As for cultural bias, researchers have addressed this. They've had tests made by African educators, using African cultural references, given to students who have never seen a non-African by African teachers and they get the same results. Others have tried non written/verbal test structures, like reflexes to measure "quickness of mind" and gotten slightly lower results for people who had improved with exposure to tests (i.e., test-taking ability bias).
Really, the burden of proof should be on the radical egalitarians to prove every subset of humans on the planet has the same intelligence distribution. No one ever believed this idea throughout human history, in any culture, up until the mid-20th century and it is currently only believed by western leftists. It makes no sense from our understanding of evolutionary biology. Humans left Africa about 50,000 years ago, and since then inhabited vastly different environments, with vastly different selection pressure, selecting against different traits and resulting in distinct human haplogroups with different characteristics. Variations in skin color, height, weight, facial features, susceptibility to different diseases. By what theory is intelligence excluded from the dependent variables shaped by 50,000 years of disparate selection pressure?
A casual examination of technological, cultural, and philosophical progress indicates different groups of humans have different raw intellectual abilities. Scientific study proves it, and while perhaps tests could be biased, they're not so biased to account for 30 point differences in IQ.
By what mechanism did so much about humans change when they left Africa, but not intelligence? Is it a type of Creationist magic, where at that moment mankind was frozen in mental equivalence for all time, and then made immune to evolution thereafter while every other creature continued to be shaped by selection pressure?
Prove to me that the average petrol-sniffing Australian aborigine is equally as intelligent as the average Japanese person. This seems like a preposterous claim on the face of it, and it is only the radical egalitarian left in the west that makes it (no Japanese, Indian, or Chinese scientist would attest to this, neither would an average African who does not share western leftist political ideology).
It should be on the left to prove biological intellectual equivalence between the different ethnicities of man, and I don't see any evidence for it. Only emotional appeals and moral outrage. That is not a good argument.
While I agree he is unlikely to be 'compromised' aka a Putin puppet, there are plenty of signals that he is at least influenced by Putin and the question remains why?
I think you're coming from the left's default position of "Putin is a monster so no one can possibly be neutral or pro-Putin unless they're under his sway." There are lots of bad guys in the world that the left and media doesn't seem to really give a shit about. Saudi Arabia. China. So one can say "we'll work with our Saudi Arabian allies to fight terrorism" and nobody bats an eye, but say "we will work with Russia to fight terrorism" and everyone loses their minds. Putin's not a good guy, but he's not throwing gays off rooftops, beheading apostates, stuffing women into sacks or sponsoring terrorism.
All the pre-election contacts, public outcries of admiration, financial interests and lack of financial transparancy on behalf of mr Trump warrant an investigation.
What "pre-election contacts?" These don't exist with regards to the Trump organization, or if you're talking about cabinet members are incidental to their jobs and are an exercise in confirmation bias. Yes, Jeff Sessions made chit-chat with the Russian ambassador at a cocktail party...along with some 30 other ambassadors and senators. It's part of their jobs as senators. Yes, Rex Tillerson did oil business with Russian companies. Also, pretty much every other nation on the planet as Exxon is a global energy producer. In order to find anything odd about these interactions you have to start with the conclusion "Trump and Russia are up to no good" and then hunt for "clues." You can't possibly start from a minor campaign surrogate meeting with 30 ambassadors and conclude there's something nefarious going on with this one specifically.
As for "public outcries of admiration," Trump is very simple: if you say nice things about him, he will say nice things about you. If you say mean things about him, he will say mean things about you. This encourages people to say nice things about him and not say mean things about him, which is useful in persuading an electorate to vote for him. Putin said nice things about Trump, so Trump said nice things about Putin. I think this is rather pleasant because I would like there to be peace between our nations. I see no reason for the US and Russia to be enemies. We have a common enemy in Islamic jihad, and I would much rather Russia expend their blood and treasure stomping terrorists in their backyard than us doing it. However, the media twists "Wouldn't it be nice if we got along with Russia?" into a "public outcry of admiration." Essentially anything that isn't "NUKE MOSCOW RIGHT NOW" is "pro-Russia." Why is it not possible to be "Russia-neutral?"
Especially considering the minor relevance of Russia for trade.
Exactly. Why does anyone give a shit what Russia does in Russia's sphere of influence? The USSR was a threat because they were bent on global ideological domination. I see no indication Putin has world domination desires. The main interest we should have with Russia is our common interest of blowing up hadjis.
Trump is the one who has been making public statements of support for Russia over and over again, why is his team so focused on it instead of China?
I don't think he is. I think that's the lens of the news media. During pretty much every rally speech Trump talks about how "China is ripping us off on trade!" and yesterday Wilbur Ross imposed a $1.9 billion fine on Chinese company ZTE for violating trade sanctions on exports to North Korea and Iran and there's not a peep out of the media. But if Trump even utters the word "Russia" it dominates the news cycle for 3 days. I don't think Trump gives a shit about Russia except that he'd like them to spend their money on their bombs to drop on ragheads, and that's about it. The media are the ones fixated on Russia.
Which is as I said, that's the thinking straight out of Animal Farm.
Just to clarify, you're right, I just say that anti-racism is nothing that came out of Christianity. "Race" is a matter of flesh, and therefore of the material domain, which is irrelevant to Christ's spiritual teachings.
I'm not saying Christianity is racist. I'm saying it was also not anti-racist. "Race" was simply not an issue addressed by Christianity (except to say that God is the God of all races), and I don't think you'll find the history of Western Civilization before the middle of the 20th century to be full of the impassioned screeds of moral philosophers (Christian or otherwise) against the evils of racism. To my knowledge no one ever considered that racism (that is, the noticing of differences in ethnic groups of people) to be a bad thing until Leon Trotsky pointed it out, and he was a communist atheist Jew. And today, "racism" is the Original Sin of the predominately atheist materialist left, not Christianity.
So while I agree with you that anti-racism or racial egalitarianism is something out of Animal Farm, I hardly think you can attribute that to Christianity when we had 1900 years of racist or not-anti-racist Christians before a communist atheist Jew said "racism is a bad thing," and the rise of anti-racism and leftist thought in the west coincides with the decline of Christianity.
Neither racism nor anti-racism are Christian concepts, because those are matters of flesh, not spirit.
Okay, great, we're mostly agreed. I thought you were being ironic. That said, Sweden, ground zero for retarded leftist westerners, is the least religious nation in Europe with some 80% of Swedes identifying as non-believers.
So, imagine a Somalian two standard deviations above the mean (top 5% of Somalians). That'd put him at an IQ of 98. Are the possibilities really "endless" when the top 5% of them have an IQ only about the same as your typical UPS delivery man? Do you think a lot of our doctors and scientists are sporting 98 IQs?
And remember, that's the best of the best. 50% of them have IQs below 68, which is literal moron territory. That is, too stupid to understand the consequences of "if I rape that would be bad and I would go to jail." Is it really worth putting up with half a million such individuals in your nice, cozy, high-trust 1st world society in order to get those 50,000 amazing 98 IQ "scientists" and "doctors?"
"Contacts with" is still zero evidence of compromise. And the left has re-defined "pro-Russia" to mean "anything short of immediately nuking Moscow."
The left is desperate and grasping at straws. What you are experiencing is confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance induced hallucinations. I will not join you in your paranoid delusions.
Your links are just lists of places where the bible uses the word "equality." That has nothing to do with the context of the discussion, which is biological equivalence between different groups of humans, which is absolutely not part of Christian philosophy, which says that while all humans are loved by God, they are not equivalent or interchangeable. There are lots of different meanings of the word "equality" but in this context we're talking about the distribution of intelligence in different groups of humans.
Answer these questions truthfully:
1. Is the average intelligence of ethnic Somalians higher than, lower than, or equal to the average intelligence of ethnic Japanese?
2. If you surveyed Japanese geneticists and asked that same question, what would they say?
3. If the answers to 1) and 2) are different, why do you think that is?
What do any of those outlets have to do with "swamping the cycle" by doing the things he said he'd do (ban travel from certain countries, repeal ObamaCare)? He's taking direct action. No propaganda is required.
And I for one welcome our new Deep State overlords! I’d like to remind them that as a trusted Slashdot personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground server farms.
Where is equality mentioned in the bible? "Equality" is not part of Christianity.
Now one could say we're all equally unworthy, but equally loved in the eyes of God. One can argue we should be equal under the law. But only retarded leftist westerners believe we're equal in the eyes of Mother Nature.
No Chinese scientist, no Indian scientist, no Japanese scientist, no African will tell you all humans are biologically equivalent. Only the western leftist will look at petrol-sniffing Australian aborigines and the Japanese and tell you they can detect no biological difference between these humans, despite knowledge of evolutionary biology, genetics, our understanding of distinct human haplogroups and of course their own lying eyes. And then they'll turn around and spit at Christians for "not believing in science," like they do.
In what way am I supporting eugenics? All I'm saying is Sweden's multiculti fantasy is a lie because science, which I thought slashdotters were supposed to care about.
My policy position would not be eugenic (i.e., trying to "elevate" the Somalians). I would leave them in Somalia, because you can take the Somalian out of Somalia but you can't take the Somalia out of Somalians. In what way am I wrong?
Terrorism is better destroyed by education than it is by bombs and guns.
It's not terrorism, it's regular old crime. Rape, robbery, extortion.
You know what causes that? Stupidity and low impulse control. You know what causes stupidity? Genetics. Education doesn't make you any smarter. You go in to school with an IQ of 68 (the average IQ in Somalia) and you come out with an IQ of 68. And you sure don't get a magic +30 IQ points crossing a border.
So, good luck with that whole thing, Sweden. I'm sure it'll work out great for you.
Possibly. Also, possibly, nobody gives a shit because every Russian and Chinaman (and everyone else) already knows their governments have bugged their assholes. "The corrupt commie governments are doing corrupt commie shit!" isn't exactly breaking news.
There is zero evidence WikiLeaks is compromised by Putin. There is zero evidence Trump is compromised by Putin. If anything the "Putin is super powerful and can haxx0r the whole planet and everyone's minds!!!" narrative is the Russian propaganda to make Putin seem far, far more powerful than he actually is. In reality, Russia is a paper tiger (bear?) with a GDP smaller than that of Spain. The left needs a boogeyman to distract from their failures and they're happy to buy right into Putin's propaganda and spread it for him.
I never said it was about the refugees. Tell me, are those organized criminals ethnic Swedes?
Sweden imported Somalians and then want to pretend as though their magic Swedish dirt turned them into people with the intelligence and cultural values of Swedes. It didn't.
The problem with malware and high tech devices is that they cannot always be accurately contained.
Oh, very insightful. What, in reading the story from WikiLeaks, about the leaked trove of CIA hacking tools, led you to believe the hacking tools could not always be contained?
Also, the existence of weapons isn't really a problem. Yes, the government has cyber weapons. They also have nuclear weapons that can annihilate the entire planet. What matters is the manner in which such things are, or are not used. I'm not terrified because the FBI has the ability to kick down my door at any time. Of course they can. Doors have been kickdownable since the invention of doors and kicking. My protection against having my door kicked down is not the removal of boots from the FBI or an unkickdownable door, but a piece of paper that says they can't do it without a warrant from a judge to whom they have demonstrated probable cause that I have committed a crime. So, the CIA's weapons are fine. But is anybody checking to see how they're using them, and who they're using them on? Somehow I doubt it.
Slashdot Mirror
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=aver...
Pick your source.
As for cultural bias, researchers have addressed this. They've had tests made by African educators, using African cultural references, given to students who have never seen a non-African by African teachers and they get the same results. Others have tried non written/verbal test structures, like reflexes to measure "quickness of mind" and gotten slightly lower results for people who had improved with exposure to tests (i.e., test-taking ability bias).
Really, the burden of proof should be on the radical egalitarians to prove every subset of humans on the planet has the same intelligence distribution. No one ever believed this idea throughout human history, in any culture, up until the mid-20th century and it is currently only believed by western leftists. It makes no sense from our understanding of evolutionary biology. Humans left Africa about 50,000 years ago, and since then inhabited vastly different environments, with vastly different selection pressure, selecting against different traits and resulting in distinct human haplogroups with different characteristics. Variations in skin color, height, weight, facial features, susceptibility to different diseases. By what theory is intelligence excluded from the dependent variables shaped by 50,000 years of disparate selection pressure?
A casual examination of technological, cultural, and philosophical progress indicates different groups of humans have different raw intellectual abilities. Scientific study proves it, and while perhaps tests could be biased, they're not so biased to account for 30 point differences in IQ.
By what mechanism did so much about humans change when they left Africa, but not intelligence? Is it a type of Creationist magic, where at that moment mankind was frozen in mental equivalence for all time, and then made immune to evolution thereafter while every other creature continued to be shaped by selection pressure?
Prove to me that the average petrol-sniffing Australian aborigine is equally as intelligent as the average Japanese person. This seems like a preposterous claim on the face of it, and it is only the radical egalitarian left in the west that makes it (no Japanese, Indian, or Chinese scientist would attest to this, neither would an average African who does not share western leftist political ideology).
It should be on the left to prove biological intellectual equivalence between the different ethnicities of man, and I don't see any evidence for it. Only emotional appeals and moral outrage. That is not a good argument.
An ethic of reciprocity
Do you think Swedish altruism towards Somalians is reciprocated?
Do you think Somalians practice reciprocal altruism among themselves?
While I agree he is unlikely to be 'compromised' aka a Putin puppet, there are plenty of signals that he is at least influenced by Putin and the question remains why?
I think you're coming from the left's default position of "Putin is a monster so no one can possibly be neutral or pro-Putin unless they're under his sway." There are lots of bad guys in the world that the left and media doesn't seem to really give a shit about. Saudi Arabia. China. So one can say "we'll work with our Saudi Arabian allies to fight terrorism" and nobody bats an eye, but say "we will work with Russia to fight terrorism" and everyone loses their minds. Putin's not a good guy, but he's not throwing gays off rooftops, beheading apostates, stuffing women into sacks or sponsoring terrorism.
All the pre-election contacts, public outcries of admiration, financial interests and lack of financial transparancy on behalf of mr Trump warrant an investigation.
What "pre-election contacts?" These don't exist with regards to the Trump organization, or if you're talking about cabinet members are incidental to their jobs and are an exercise in confirmation bias. Yes, Jeff Sessions made chit-chat with the Russian ambassador at a cocktail party...along with some 30 other ambassadors and senators. It's part of their jobs as senators. Yes, Rex Tillerson did oil business with Russian companies. Also, pretty much every other nation on the planet as Exxon is a global energy producer. In order to find anything odd about these interactions you have to start with the conclusion "Trump and Russia are up to no good" and then hunt for "clues." You can't possibly start from a minor campaign surrogate meeting with 30 ambassadors and conclude there's something nefarious going on with this one specifically.
As for "public outcries of admiration," Trump is very simple: if you say nice things about him, he will say nice things about you. If you say mean things about him, he will say mean things about you. This encourages people to say nice things about him and not say mean things about him, which is useful in persuading an electorate to vote for him. Putin said nice things about Trump, so Trump said nice things about Putin. I think this is rather pleasant because I would like there to be peace between our nations. I see no reason for the US and Russia to be enemies. We have a common enemy in Islamic jihad, and I would much rather Russia expend their blood and treasure stomping terrorists in their backyard than us doing it. However, the media twists "Wouldn't it be nice if we got along with Russia?" into a "public outcry of admiration." Essentially anything that isn't "NUKE MOSCOW RIGHT NOW" is "pro-Russia." Why is it not possible to be "Russia-neutral?"
Especially considering the minor relevance of Russia for trade.
Exactly. Why does anyone give a shit what Russia does in Russia's sphere of influence? The USSR was a threat because they were bent on global ideological domination. I see no indication Putin has world domination desires. The main interest we should have with Russia is our common interest of blowing up hadjis.
Trump is the one who has been making public statements of support for Russia over and over again, why is his team so focused on it instead of China?
I don't think he is. I think that's the lens of the news media. During pretty much every rally speech Trump talks about how "China is ripping us off on trade!" and yesterday Wilbur Ross imposed a $1.9 billion fine on Chinese company ZTE for violating trade sanctions on exports to North Korea and Iran and there's not a peep out of the media. But if Trump even utters the word "Russia" it dominates the news cycle for 3 days. I don't think Trump gives a shit about Russia except that he'd like them to spend their money on their bombs to drop on ragheads, and that's about it. The media are the ones fixated on Russia.
Which is as I said, that's the thinking straight out of Animal Farm.
Just to clarify, you're right, I just say that anti-racism is nothing that came out of Christianity. "Race" is a matter of flesh, and therefore of the material domain, which is irrelevant to Christ's spiritual teachings.
I'm not saying Christianity is racist. I'm saying it was also not anti-racist. "Race" was simply not an issue addressed by Christianity (except to say that God is the God of all races), and I don't think you'll find the history of Western Civilization before the middle of the 20th century to be full of the impassioned screeds of moral philosophers (Christian or otherwise) against the evils of racism. To my knowledge no one ever considered that racism (that is, the noticing of differences in ethnic groups of people) to be a bad thing until Leon Trotsky pointed it out, and he was a communist atheist Jew. And today, "racism" is the Original Sin of the predominately atheist materialist left, not Christianity.
So while I agree with you that anti-racism or racial egalitarianism is something out of Animal Farm, I hardly think you can attribute that to Christianity when we had 1900 years of racist or not-anti-racist Christians before a communist atheist Jew said "racism is a bad thing," and the rise of anti-racism and leftist thought in the west coincides with the decline of Christianity.
Neither racism nor anti-racism are Christian concepts, because those are matters of flesh, not spirit.
Okay, great, we're mostly agreed. I thought you were being ironic. That said, Sweden, ground zero for retarded leftist westerners, is the least religious nation in Europe with some 80% of Swedes identifying as non-believers.
Trump eats lunch and then takes a shit. Is that right wing Rooskie propaganda?
So, imagine a Somalian two standard deviations above the mean (top 5% of Somalians). That'd put him at an IQ of 98. Are the possibilities really "endless" when the top 5% of them have an IQ only about the same as your typical UPS delivery man? Do you think a lot of our doctors and scientists are sporting 98 IQs?
And remember, that's the best of the best. 50% of them have IQs below 68, which is literal moron territory. That is, too stupid to understand the consequences of "if I rape that would be bad and I would go to jail." Is it really worth putting up with half a million such individuals in your nice, cozy, high-trust 1st world society in order to get those 50,000 amazing 98 IQ "scientists" and "doctors?"
Really? Guess you better get the word to all those evil racist eugenicists on Wikipedia.
"Contacts with" is still zero evidence of compromise. And the left has re-defined "pro-Russia" to mean "anything short of immediately nuking Moscow."
The left is desperate and grasping at straws. What you are experiencing is confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance induced hallucinations. I will not join you in your paranoid delusions.
Thank you for putting in the work. That was very helpful.
Quite a few places. Just a couple search results
Your links are just lists of places where the bible uses the word "equality." That has nothing to do with the context of the discussion, which is biological equivalence between different groups of humans, which is absolutely not part of Christian philosophy, which says that while all humans are loved by God, they are not equivalent or interchangeable. There are lots of different meanings of the word "equality" but in this context we're talking about the distribution of intelligence in different groups of humans.
Answer these questions truthfully:
1. Is the average intelligence of ethnic Somalians higher than, lower than, or equal to the average intelligence of ethnic Japanese?
2. If you surveyed Japanese geneticists and asked that same question, what would they say?
3. If the answers to 1) and 2) are different, why do you think that is?
The grenade attacks are in Malmo, though. Is that a heavily Russian area?
What do any of those outlets have to do with "swamping the cycle" by doing the things he said he'd do (ban travel from certain countries, repeal ObamaCare)? He's taking direct action. No propaganda is required.
Also, do you realize "snark" isn't an argument?
How much education do we need to give to the 68 IQ Somalian to turn him into 160+ IQ Albert Einstein? Or even 78 IQ D00MSlayer?
Crime is more a result of people collectively lacking scruples sound enough to write and uphold laws that weren't meant to be broken from the onset.
From where do scruples come?
And I for one welcome our new Deep State overlords! I’d like to remind them that as a trusted Slashdot personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground server farms.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=aver...
Pick your source.
Only insults; no arguments. Hmmm.
Where is equality mentioned in the bible? "Equality" is not part of Christianity.
Now one could say we're all equally unworthy, but equally loved in the eyes of God. One can argue we should be equal under the law. But only retarded leftist westerners believe we're equal in the eyes of Mother Nature.
No Chinese scientist, no Indian scientist, no Japanese scientist, no African will tell you all humans are biologically equivalent. Only the western leftist will look at petrol-sniffing Australian aborigines and the Japanese and tell you they can detect no biological difference between these humans, despite knowledge of evolutionary biology, genetics, our understanding of distinct human haplogroups and of course their own lying eyes. And then they'll turn around and spit at Christians for "not believing in science," like they do.
In what way am I supporting eugenics? All I'm saying is Sweden's multiculti fantasy is a lie because science, which I thought slashdotters were supposed to care about.
My policy position would not be eugenic (i.e., trying to "elevate" the Somalians). I would leave them in Somalia, because you can take the Somalian out of Somalia but you can't take the Somalia out of Somalians. In what way am I wrong?
Terrorism is better destroyed by education than it is by bombs and guns.
It's not terrorism, it's regular old crime. Rape, robbery, extortion.
You know what causes that? Stupidity and low impulse control. You know what causes stupidity? Genetics. Education doesn't make you any smarter. You go in to school with an IQ of 68 (the average IQ in Somalia) and you come out with an IQ of 68. And you sure don't get a magic +30 IQ points crossing a border.
So, good luck with that whole thing, Sweden. I'm sure it'll work out great for you.
Possibly. Also, possibly, nobody gives a shit because every Russian and Chinaman (and everyone else) already knows their governments have bugged their assholes. "The corrupt commie governments are doing corrupt commie shit!" isn't exactly breaking news.
There is zero evidence WikiLeaks is compromised by Putin. There is zero evidence Trump is compromised by Putin. If anything the "Putin is super powerful and can haxx0r the whole planet and everyone's minds!!!" narrative is the Russian propaganda to make Putin seem far, far more powerful than he actually is. In reality, Russia is a paper tiger (bear?) with a GDP smaller than that of Spain. The left needs a boogeyman to distract from their failures and they're happy to buy right into Putin's propaganda and spread it for him.
47th dimensional reverse underwater backgammon confirmed.
I never said it was about the refugees. Tell me, are those organized criminals ethnic Swedes?
Sweden imported Somalians and then want to pretend as though their magic Swedish dirt turned them into people with the intelligence and cultural values of Swedes. It didn't.
The problem with malware and high tech devices is that they cannot always be accurately contained.
Oh, very insightful. What, in reading the story from WikiLeaks, about the leaked trove of CIA hacking tools, led you to believe the hacking tools could not always be contained?
Also, the existence of weapons isn't really a problem. Yes, the government has cyber weapons. They also have nuclear weapons that can annihilate the entire planet. What matters is the manner in which such things are, or are not used. I'm not terrified because the FBI has the ability to kick down my door at any time. Of course they can. Doors have been kickdownable since the invention of doors and kicking. My protection against having my door kicked down is not the removal of boots from the FBI or an unkickdownable door, but a piece of paper that says they can't do it without a warrant from a judge to whom they have demonstrated probable cause that I have committed a crime. So, the CIA's weapons are fine. But is anybody checking to see how they're using them, and who they're using them on? Somehow I doubt it.