Holocaust ... and other forms of Denial

[Magical Realist]

Look, the only people who feel guilt are the guilty and those suffering a guilt complex.

No..that's not true at all. Many people feel guilty who aren't actually guilty. Guilt is easily instilled by manipulative cons to get people to submit to them. Religion is well-known for this, weekly instilling shame and guilt in people for their supposed sins so as to keep them compliant to and dependent on them. OTOH there are many people who are guilty but who don't feel guilt. Psychopaths for instance.

 

[Syne]

Yeah, irrational guilt due to manipulation....just like white guilt for actions never perpetrated by the individual.
Psychopaths know right from wrong and would feel guilt, if they had the emotional capacity for it.

 

[iceaura]

Did I dispute that it began under Nixon or had white backing? No.

Yes, in your posts to me. Like this one:

Again, that trend started long before '68, but you've already shown an aversion to inconvenient fact

1) The mass transfer of the white bigot vote to the Republican Party started during and after 1964, and its first national election was Nixon's in 1968.
2) It wouldn't matter. Nixon did what he did, Reagan did what he did. The record doesn't change, the timeline doesn't change.

With deductibles they can't cover and no job growth to help.

But better off. Your assertion was false, even in the real life circumstances you deny.

Yes, because the "redlining" reported was just sensible lending qualifications.

Redlining, specifically, is geographical isolation. It has nothing in particular to do with lending qualifications. From your link:

During the heyday of redlining, the areas most frequently discriminated against were black inner city neighborhoods. For example, in Atlanta in the 1980s, a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles by investigative-reporter Bill Dedmanshowed that banks would often lend to lower-income whites but not to middle- or upper-income blacks.

Reverse redlining occurs when a lender or insurer targets nonwhite consumers, not to deny them loans or insurance, but rather to charge them more than could be charged to a comparable white consumer. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

That can happen at the same time as redlining, and in tandem with it rather than in "reverse" - when black people can normally get loans only in certain districts and for certain things (an aspect of redlining) it is easier to coerce them into unfavorable terms both inside and outside those areas. That is one of the rewards of redlining and similar forms of collusion in the financial industry. (Wiki is wrong).
And that of course happened - at least as late as the mid-2000s.

You're credibility slips daily. Where's you evidence of "both at the same time in the same areas, especially afflicting black people".

The predatory lending afflicting black people - payday loan operations, steering them into ARMs when they qualified for better, etc - focused on (and took advantage of) certain districts, in which black people more easily obtained loans. You didn't notice that?

Where's the evidence for your claims?

All around you, in everyday life and any Google search - including a few links like the Ehrlichman eyewitness interview. Where's the evidence for yours? Your links don't support them.

Look, the only people who feel guilt are the guilty and those suffering a guilt complex. Which are you?

Nobody cares about guilt here, except you guys. Find another thread for your personal psychological problems, how about.

 

[Syne]

But better off.

You don't get medical service if you can't afford your deductible.

(Wiki is wrong).

Denying facts and repeatedly failing to support your own assertions means you are just trolling.

 

[Michael]

You're badly confused. Your reasoning is invalid. You've been provided here with examples (height), and correction, to no avail. Learn better, or keep proclaiming that same basic stupidity for the rest of your life, in public, in front of people who know better.

Nature Genetics: Defining the role of common variation in the genomic and biological architecture of adult human height.

It turns out, when you conduct a scientific study, about 80% of your final adult height, is determined by your genes.

I listed several factors known to significantly lower IQ scores, and known to be unevenly distributed by race in the US, and known to afflict black people in particular due to white racism in the US.

Yet you haven't provided any evidence that any of these 'several factors' / White Racism significantly lower the IQ scores of Black People or is raising IQ scores of Yellow People.

See, what you have is a pet theory. And, to tell you the truth, I personally would prefer that the 'blank slate' theory were true. Why? Because I'm a strong advocate of peaceful parenting - a parenting technique that emphases instruction through modeling correct types of behaviors, zero use of physical punishment (really, explanation replaces any form of punishment - verbal included) and later in life, formal instruction in basic logic. It would be nice to think 100% of a child's potential is dependent on environment. I like to use the analogy of teaching language. You wouldn't 'hit' a child for mispronouncing a word or using incorrect grammar. You'd just repeat the sentence or word correctly. Language is a complex trait, we have two specific areas of the brain to process it and produce it, there's no need to 'punish'. Punishing a child, would probably be detrimental. Just model the correct behavior.

But, what I 'want' to be true, is not true. The Scientific Data strongly suggests that while child IQ is malleable, final adult IQ is 50 - 85% genetic. Of course, I am still a strong advocate of peaceful parenting. Each individual child will get the best chance to reach their potential - perhaps not a rocket scientist, but that's fine. And, in a free society, where most well paid jobs do not require massively high IQ, most people will do fine. Of course, we live in a Progressive Socialist society where regulatory capture locks low IQ people (of any color) out and keeps them from freely competing with rent-seekers (see: Medicine, hair dresser, taxi cab driver, layer, etc...). Which is why most poor people are White People (more White Peoples have lower IQ's than Black Peoples).

Everything from twin adoption studies; MRI scans; non-cultural IQ tests (some that can be explained without language, others that only require repeating numbers forwards and backwards); even total brain volume - ALL are congruent in their finding that brain function (as we term intelligence) is mostly genetic, with E. Asians having the slowest pace of development to maturity, the largest brain volume and the highest IQ.

They make 20,000 more a year than Whites too - which makes sense.


Regardless of 'racism', in a (relatively) free market (like engineering or computer programming) Yellow People are hired at a much higher rate than their percent total population. Look at Google, Microsoft, Yahoo or Facebook and you will find E. Asians punch way above their weight in terms of hires. According to you, it must be because some secret 'White Lizard People' hold down Whites... and are lifting Yellows. Yahoo has a female CEO - yet, most males doing the coding, again, not genetic, must be..... Lizard People.

You can continue to peddle this nonsense of White Racism and its effect on IQ (or height) - it's not going to change the cognitive abilities needed to code an AI, or to send a rocket to mars, or do complex math. AND companies will hire accordingly.


You are a science denier.


Your cherished beliefs (blank slate theory) is no different than those of the Catholics who imprisoned Galileo. A convoluted story about "White Racism" in order to fit your Ptolemaic view of the Universe with the observable data. Worse than asinine.



As an aside: Did you know that Jewish "White People" have very high IQ (verbal reasoning)? You also may have heard of WWII? A lot of "White Racism" back then. Millions of Jewish Germans and other Jews were carted off to ovens and burned alive (by Authoritarian Socialists by the way - they probably thought of themselves as Progressive). As a matter of fact, I started the thread noting that the number of non-Jewish was a lie. In fact, the vast majority of people killed were just Jewish. How interesting, that this lie was believed (and is still believed). It wasn't barely commented on in the "News". Anyway, how ironic that after such a horrid event, high IQ Jewish (50 - 85% genetic) were able to - in a single generation, become one of the most wealthiest groups in the (relatively) free-market West. I wonder how? Given your theory of "White Racism" towards Jews - how could this have happened?

Why aren't they poor I wonder? How did their IQ get so high I wonder? Could it maybe have something to do with the face 50 - 85% of IQ is genetic? Hmmmm....Do you think, perhaps, just maybe, it can be explained by their high IQ? Gee, just like the Yellow Peoples?



You know, there's a number of 'conspiracy theories' whereby (mainly low-IQ) people believe in White Lizard People - who secretly control the world; holding down Blacks (for example). And then you have the White People who are poor (and low IQ), many of them believe that the "Jews" secretly control the world. It's pretty much a mirror of your 'White Racism' Theory - only it's "The Jews". Sure, maybe Lizard People walk the Earth - OR, wait for it, perhaps in industrial and post-industrial societies, people (of any color) with high IQ, are best able to traverse Government Schools and gain entry into the hyper-Regulated Markets to become well off Rent-Seekers. Further, just due to a genetic based high IQ, many simply out-compete low IQ people, and become rich. Do different than a skilled basketball player running circles around a noodle arm white Jewish kid on the court.



Sometimes, the simplest answer, is in fact the answer.



Oh? And the solution? That's easy: Peaceful Parenting, free-markets, sound money, common law. Notice how the Anarchist / Libertarian solution differs markedly from the Progressive Socialists (many of whom were Eugenicists). Just something to note.

 

[iceaura]

You don't get medical service if you can't afford your deductible.

Obamacare is one way black people became better off due to Obama's initiatives. Record the fact, adjust your claims.

Yet you haven't provided any evidence that any of these 'several factors' / White Racism significantly lower the IQ scores of Black People or is raising IQ scores of Yellow People.

Yellow people are irrelevant to your denial at issue, why do you keep bringing them up?
As I have posted several times now, I know of no adequate research data allowing us to reliably estimate the effects of even one of those factors, let alone the combined effects of them all, on the average black IQ score in the US. I've seen anywhere from 2 to 20 points, but always extrapolated from some small and local study.

Which means, as you have been informed several time now, that your entire argument is bogus - your population comparison requires that the combined differential influence of all these factors be near zero, that is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence, and you have posted absolutely nothing in support.

See, what you have is a pet theory. And, to tell you the truth, I personally would prefer that the 'blank slate' theory were true.
- -
Your cherished beliefs (blank slate theory)

Once again: I have no such theory. I don't believe in blank slates, and nothing I post here is based on any such presumption. You have been corrected in that same, simple, obvious, and unmotivated mistake at least six times.

Look: You are having a lot of trouble following a very simple argument. I point you to the exact problem central to your public error, I even provide an example - height - that illustrates how you are going wrong using a physical variable with none of the assessment and interpretation problems of IQ, and you remain unable to comprehend the situation.

Sometimes, the simplest answer, is in fact the answer.

The simplest answer here is that you are very stupid - low IQ, faced with something beyond your abilities. But I don't think that accounts for this. I think you, like Syne, are in denial.

That is what denial looks like, see. You have a world of physical fact and recurrent event in front of you, you refuse to incorporate it, and you replace it with various fictions and fantasies. You are in denial of the role of white racism against black people in the US, a major factor over its entire history and right up until yesterday.

 

[Syne]

Obamacare is one way black people became better off due to Obama's initiatives. Record the fact, adjust your claims.

Quit making unsupported bare assertions. Do you even know what a deductible is?

 

[iceaura]

Quit making unsupported bare assertions. Do you even know what a deductible is?

Another benefit, another way black people were better off as a consequence of Obama's tenure despite the Republican blocking of most of his initiatives, is in his partial arrest of the decline in black people's fortunes that had been the trend since 1980. Prevention of some bad does not look as creditable as accomplishment of good, but in this case it is every bit as praiseworthy.

 

[Syne]

Obamacare is one way black people became better off due to Obama's initiatives. Record the fact, adjust your claims.

Quit making unsupported bare assertions. Do you even know what a deductible is?

Another benefit, another way black people were better off as a consequence of Obama's tenure despite the Republican blocking of most of his initiatives, is in his partial arrest of the decline in black people's fortunes that had been the trend since 1980. Prevention of some bad does not look as creditable as accomplishment of good, but in this case it is every bit as praiseworthy.

Apparently you don't know what a deductible is.
And it seems you've abandoned your Obamacare helped blacks claim, since you couldn't support it.
And again, not support for your next bare assertion.

http://blackdemographics.com/households/african-american-income/

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/15/news/economy/blacks-trump-obama/

Black income dropped more under Obama than under either Bush, and black poverty seems to have only gotten worse under Obama. Your claim of a downward trend since 1980 is an obvious lie.
You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[iceaura]

Black income dropped more under Obama than under either Bush, and black poverty seems to have only gotten worse under Obama. Your claim of a downward trend since 1980 is an obvious lie.

So a recent downward trend in black household median income contradicts my claim of a general downward trend in the fortunes of black people since 1980.

Got it.

The part where you claim black people's suffering under the effects of the crash of '08 was due to Obama's presidency,

following on the heels of your denial of white racism's contribution to the mortgage banking abuses leading up to the Crash

was a particularly revealing illustration of how denial works.

 

[Syne]

So a recent downward trend in black household median income contradicts my claim of a general downward trend in the fortunes of black people since 1980.

Got it.

No, the actual black income trend since 1980 contradicts your "general downward trend in the fortunes of black people since 1980":

The part where you claim black people's suffering under the effects of the crash of '08 was due to Obama's presidency,

following on the heels of your denial of white racism's contribution to the mortgage banking abuses leading up to the Crash

was a particularly revealing illustration of how denial works.

"The Great Recession sent many Americans into poverty, but blacks were hit particularly hard. The rate for blacks hit 27.6% in 2011, nearly 2 percentage points higher than what it was when Obama was sworn in." - http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/15/news/economy/blacks-trump-obama/​

Fact: Blacks fared worse under Obama than whites.
You're just projecting your own copious denials on others, without any supporting evidence.

 

[Michael]

Yellow people are irrelevant to your denial at issue, why do you keep bringing them up?

A single black swan disproves the premise that all swans are white. Yellow People are a minority, they make 20,000 per year more money than Whites. "White Racism" doesn't hold minorities down in the USA. What holds ALL people of ANY color down in the USA is regulatory-capture. It does so because it was designed to do this. Together with Government Schools, low IQ people are locked out of markets. It's called Progressive Socialism and it purposefully disenfranchises people with inherently low IQ (which are for the most part, white people in the USA by the by).

Welcome to "Democratic" Socialism iceaura.

As I have posted several times now, I know of no adequate research data allowing us to reliably estimate the effects of even one of those factors, let alone the combined effects of them all, on the average black IQ score in the US.

You know what we do in science when we test and test and test and find no effect? We conclude that it is likely that there is no significant effect. We have a very limited number of groups of people in the USA, with two groups: Yellow People and (Jewish) White People: both minorities that have been discriminated against (Yellow People were colonized, invaded, and nuked) and Jewish White people were nearly exterminated just a generation ago and greatly prejudiced against, both of these minorities have higher than average IQ (inherently) and both groups are over represented in university placements (given them prime advantage in regulated markets: law, medicine, dentistry, vet med, etc...) and thus will naturally in a government regulated system - make more money.

THAT is why we have this system. So, the conclusion isn't that "White People" are racist, the conclusion is Progressive Socialism purposely discriminates against low-IQ people (which is mostly genetic). Just what the hell do you think the MCAT, ACT, SAT, LSAT, etc... are made to do? They're made to select for high-IQ people (which is mostly genetic).

I have no problem with assessments in a free-market. See, it doesn't take an IQ of 150 to be a vet. Just comparing normality curves of different groups WITHOUT ANY label as to 'race' or 'religion' or however else you want to divide people, and you can mathematically calculate which of the groups will end up in the the best universities with the State-mandated qualifications and licences to work as highly paid rent-seekers in our Progressive so-called "Democratic" Social paradise.

It's THAT easy. No need to infer the existence of Lizard People or White Racism. Just basic math.

Which means, as you have been informed several time now, that your entire argument is bogus - your population comparison requires that the combined differential influence of all these factors be near zero, that is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence, and you have posted absolutely nothing in support.

LOL

See: Nature Genetics article above.

In order to provide you with the data you need, yellow, white and black children will have to be artificially created in a lab via IVF, with various degrees of admix, randomly placed in a yellow, white or black womb, and raised in a controlled environment. AND YET you have no qualms at all claiming "White Racism" is have an effect on Black IQ (but not Yellow or Jewish IQ).

LOL

You've moved well past rational - this is your belief. A superstition. The scientific fact is IQ is mostly genetic. The social fact is so-called "Progressive" regulations (regulatory-capture) is designed to discriminate against low-IQ people. Sure, you can claim that until we do the above IVF experiment with an alpha value of 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 you will never be satisfied and we will never truly 'know'. And an epistemologist would (probably) agree with you (lol) and it is true we can never 'know'. But, that's not how science works.

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study: Yes, this is a flawed study, all studies of human populations have flaws. One of the studies' findings was the IQs of adopted black children reared by white families did not differ significantly from that of black children raised by their biological parents.

But, yes, without randomized wombs and a perfectly controlled environment we cannot know can we? Sure. But, what we DO know is that IQ is mostly genetic. We also have evidence that Chinese raised in Britain score 110 on spatial reasoning, just as do Chinese raised in noisy, polluted, lead-tainted Chinese cities in China (and somewhat cleaner Korea or Japan for that matter). Just that one part of the IQ test (probably because they have brains that were under different selection pressures than Whites or Blacks).

AND YET, you continue to claim, without good evidence, that the problem is 'White Racism'. Not Black Racism. Not Black parenting (Blacks hit their kids more often than Whites). Not developmental differences. Not genetics. Nope, it's the good ole' magic "White Racism".

Essentially, you're a Science denier.
It's that simple.
I mean, what next? Lack of evidence of Lizard People IS evidence of Lizard People!

LOL

Seriously, THAT was one of your arguments.

The simplest answer here is that you are very stupid - low IQ, faced with something beyond your abilities. But I don't think that accounts for this. I think you, like Syne, are in denial.

LOL

"The personal attack is the last refuge of the scoundrel who has nothing of substance to say."
--Edmund Burke



That's what makes this thread so interesting. How dear we hold on to our beloved pet theories in the face of cold-hard science. Which is, I believe, why we will see a push for censorship and curtailing of free-speech in the USA. I stick by my assessment, the USA has never been more ripe a fruit to be picked by a pedagogue than now. Yes, a fork in the road, can change everything, but history suggests the only way to correct the problems of progressive socialism / State Authoritarianism, that is satisfactory to the general public, will be via an elected Dictator. Think about it. When faced with clearing out the malfeasance of the Central Banking criminals, Americans supported bailing them out, not jailing them. Not the free-market. No. Instead Americans wanted the Authoritairan State to fix things for them - and they will continue to want it to fix more and more things for them. Until it finally fixes everything.

The path is forward is clear to see IMO.

 

[iceaura]

So a recent downward trend in black household median income contradicts my claim of a general downward trend in the fortunes of black people since 1980.

Got it.
No, the actual black income trend since 1980

Why "No?" Your argument is still silly.

No, the actual black income trend since 1980 contradicts your "general downward trend in the fortunes of black people since 1980":

No, it doesn't. I was careful to not make any claims about household income, partly because I didn't want to discuss the complexity of its measurement and the likely bullshit nature of your sources in reply, and partly because I don't take household income as a good indicator of "fortune" in general.

Fact: Blacks fared worse under Obama than whites.

Due significantly to the effects of white racism, in particular specifically Republican policies since 1980, as the white racist-dominated Republican Party gained power and established them as US national policies.

 

[iceaura]

A single black swan disproves the premise that all swans are white.

No such premise is on the table. The premise on the table is that white swans are significant and influential members of the swan population in the US.

"White Racism" doesn't hold minorities down in the USA.

Your denial is specific: you are denying the effects of white racism on black people in the US.

You know what we do in science when we test and test and test and find no effect? We conclude that it is likely that there is no significant effect.

People actually "in science" - which excludes you - perform the tests first, before declaring there is no effect. This is especially of interest when there appear to be large, obvious, and significant effects right in front of everybody - to deny them, they need particularly careful tests.

So, conclusion isn't that "White People" are racist, the conclusion is Progressive Socialism purposely discriminates against low-IQ people (which is mostly genetic).

There is no "conclusion" that white people are racist on the table.

There is the observation that white racism has had, and continues to have both as carryover and newly imposed, significant effects on black people in the US. That's what you are denying.

It's THAT easy. No need to infer the existence of Lizard People or White Racism.

We have here somebody who claims that white racism and its effects is a myth comparable to Lizard People conspiracy claims.

I'm just recording that fact. When people talk about the massive denial of reality currently dominating the US Republican Party and its electoral base, that kind of thing is what they are talking about.

 

[Michael]

Your denial is specific: you are denying the effects of white racism on black people in the US.

You provided some evidence to deny? Oh, that's right, lack of evidence of Lizard People WAS your evidence for Lizard People.

LOL

I suggest you go back to that fantsy-pantsy Stats book and look up the words: Modus Tollens

 

[Michael]

People actually "in science" - which excludes you - perform the tests first, before declaring there is no effect. This is especially of interest when there appear to be large, obvious, and significant effects right in front of everybody - to deny them, they need particularly careful tests.

Actually, people "in science" tend not to publish negative findings. Negative findings don't make for high impact papers. Further, people "in science", are just like any other people, and they generally don't like to swim against the current - particularly if they're not a tenured professor. At least, not if they would like to be tenured.

As it stands, you have no good evidence of White Racism causing Yellow People to have higher IQ's on a subsection of the IQ test. But get this, genetic differences provides very good evidence that it's a biological difference between Whites and Yellows.

 

[iceaura]

Actually, people "in science" tend not to publish negative findings.

Or, in your case, meaningful positive ones - none of the studies you use to link IQ to race have controlled for even a single one of the several variables I've listed above, let alone ones I haven't mentioned.
That could be because the ones that did control properly yielded negative results - no race/IQ link. But I doubt it. I think it's just that such a study would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming, and the question is trivial no matter how it's answered. It certainly wouldn't make redlining not have happened, or the other racially divided handout policies (the Homestead Acts, US agricultural subsidies until very recently) or voter suppression, or segregation, or the Drug War, or Flint's water supply issues.

As it stands, you have no good evidence of White Racism causing Yellow People to have higher IQ's on a subsection of the IQ test. But get this, genetic differences provides very good evidence that it's a biological difference between Whites and Yellows.

Which highlights the lengths you will go to avoid the topic at hand, which is your denial of the influence of white racism on black people in the US.

 

[Syne]

Why "No?" Your argument is still silly.

Still denying facts, I see.

No, it doesn't. I was careful to not make any claims about household income, partly because I didn't want to discuss the complexity of its measurement and the likely bullshit nature of your sources in reply, and partly because I don't take household income as a good indicator of "fortune" in general.

So you're simply equivocating a term you have yet to define and dismissing facts with bare assertions. What metric defines "fortune"?
I'll be surprised if you actually come up with a metric, rather than just keep up the trolling denial.

Due significantly to the effects of white racism, in particular specifically Republican policies since 1980, as the white racist-dominated Republican Party gained power and established them as US national policies.

So Obama had nothing to do with those supposed preexisting policies suddenly having worse outcomes for blacks?
You're arguments just keep becoming more ridiculous. That happens when you have to deny all facts to retain your narrative.

But how bad do blacks really have it?

 

[iceaura]

Why "No?" Your argument is still silly.
Still denying facts, I see.

Fact is, your argument was silly.

So you're simply equivocating a term you have yet to define and dismissing facts with bare assertions. What metric defines "fortune"?

I post in English, it's an English word, consult an English dictionary if you don't know what it means. I recommend the American Heritage Third Edition.

So Obama had nothing to do with those supposed preexisting policies suddenly having worse outcomes for blacks?

Obama had nothing to do with any of your wingnut mythology.

But how bad do blacks really have it?

As you pointed out, blacks got hammered by the Republican Crash. They lost a lot more than white people did, proportionately, and they had much less to begin with. They'll be a long time digging back out.

Meanwhile, wtf is up with these idiotic and irrelevant wingnut videos? White privilege? That's got nothing to do with anything posted here. It looks like more of your personal psychological obsession with guilt and stuff - plus a good strong dose of anti-Semitic bigotry, and similar ignorance, right up wingnut alley.

 

[Michael]

Or, in your case, meaningful positive ones - none of the studies you use to link IQ to race have controlled for even a single one of the several variables I've listed above, let alone ones I haven't mentioned.

LOL, you really like chancing your tail doing you?

You are the one going on about race. I posted a recent Nature Genetics article that showed IQ is between 50 - 85% genetic. That's 'race' independent. Further, studies show that IQ is directly linked to violent behavior (IQ of 85 being a danger zone) as well as prosperity (which explains why high-IQ E. Asians and Jews earn more than "Whites").

You seem to be hung up on the fact that some Black People have a low IQ - even though the number of White People with a low IQ is actually higher (what? White Racism against White People too iceaura? LOL!). You also appear to, without a shed of evidence, suggest low-IQ (just for Black People apparently) has to do with "White Racism". So far, all we have for 'evidence' of White Racism affecting IQ is you saying so. Sorry, but you saying so, isn't 'good' evidence. For White Racism affecting IQ, or Lizard People. Further, the 'good' evidence we have, strongly suggests low and high IQ scores are mostly genetic; and these correlate strongly with levels of prosperity, mainly due to Progressive Socialism via Regulatory Capture. Which is the reason why high-IQ Yellow People, make more than White People in a supposed "White Racist" society.

It's pretty simple actually. If you missed something, reread the paragraph

And get this iceaura, in time your 'Race Theory' / White People did it, is going to be tossed into the trash-bin of poorly thought out, unsound nonsensical ideas, and will be replaced with objective MRI scans and DNA tests that will clearly show a very very strong correlation with income and prosperity. And, I would think that, given just a bit more time, this will be corrected for at the germ-line level using technology such that everyone has a pretty high genetic likelihood of having at least an IQ of around 110-115.

At that time, people will look back at this age and think how sad it was so much time and resources were wasted race baiting so that a few white people could virtue signal for their daily dopamine hit.