The proof is the fact that blacks receive Affirmative Action and Asians don't.
Humans originating in Africa
- Thread starter John99
- Start date
You are so white it's uncanny. Most people don't recognize that the average white person identifies with blacks and south americans much more readily because either they are a hybrid of them, see them as subjugated as adoptees, emotionally similar but more pointedly not a perceived direct source of competition(ego). Meaning people like to put down those they secretly feel are the competition but fake another reason(pretense). Also, I've found that certain types of intellectual communication is easiest between whites and asians, whites naturally feel more emotionally comfortable with african-americans or thier hybrids. It makes sense as we identify with those we feel more personally closer to not intellectually communicating information.
Why not? Intelligence is one of our biggest racial differences.
Willy:
Your racial nonsense is off-topic for this thread. Please take it elsewhere. No, wait. Just leave it out instead.
If there are any such differences...
Immigrants are often of a higher social class than natural-born people.
Overpolicing of black people in America is indeed a major cause for concern.
Your racial nonsense is off-topic for this thread. Please take it elsewhere. No, wait. Just leave it out instead.
If there are any such differences...
Immigrants are often of a higher social class than natural-born people.
Overpolicing of black people in America is indeed a major cause for concern.
And where are you on the Asian intelligence scale? This thread has very little to do with racial intelligence. I know you must start at the bottom of the page but read the first post and go down
I'm wondering if I made some guesses about you whether I would be correct. I bet you are an american and lean toward the religious right. If not, I doubt you are a liberal. The average american tends to be quite prejudicial towards asians and see them as extremely 'different', that's because (low-class) americans are all into the comfort zones(slovenly) and anything that is different or less sloppy is not only intimidating but seen as a threat and gets those bullhorns ready. Ya know, like cattle.
Last edited:
You just asked me not to talk about any racial intelligence differences and the you ask me:
I am not sure if he is referring to anything like my example below but doesn't this mean anything?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_engine
If they had knowledge of materials to use...
Knowledge is cumulative, we observe it in our own history. It would be reasonable to conclude it is consistent.
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Theres an easy way to find out if there are average brian size, IQ, and testosterone level differences among the three major races.
However the people who continually ask such questions usually dont WANT to know.
I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong - the black "race", for example, contains more genetic variability within itself than there is in the rest of humanity combined.peta said:
Even the genes for skin color, the basis of this stupid classification system, vary as much within the darker skinned as between the darker and lighter skinned groups. There are several different ways to have melanistic skin.
Orangutans are not as peaceful as Gorillas. Are they as intelligent as chimpanzees ? Opinions vary. Are you getting your ape facts from the same source that handed you non-violent Eskimos and Vikings and Mongols ? Japanese women with wider hips than American black women?willy said:
No, there isn't. Controlling for environment is almost impossible, and defining the "races" in the first place is all but hopeless.carcano said:
If you define the genetic, verifiable, non-sociological distance between Japanese and Scots as distinguishing two different races, for example, you will end up with about six races native to Africa, all of them "black".
Give it up. Stick to sociology, self and social identification, and come back to the biological origins of sociological patterns when there is reasonable data.
Meanwhile, if you want a racial correlation that sticks, look at the one between childhood lead exposure and self-identification as "black" in the US. That you can measure. As a correlation, it "explains" most - perhaps all - of the racial differences in impulsive crime in the US.
Lead exposure also influences testosterone levels, hypertension, diabetes, measured IQ, etc.
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Defining between the three major races is done all the time in forensic science, where they can be identified with nothing more than a skull.
carcano said:
Like this?
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/ident.pdf
So the Mongoloids have shovel incisors except when they don't, the American Negro - at least a third of whom have substantial Caucasoid or Mongoloid genetic heritage - can be told from the American Caucasoid - a good many of whom have Mongoloid or Negroid genetic heritage - by the skull alone (the width ot the nasal passage is determinate, forensically),
and the American Indians (who lack shovel incisors, often) are idetnifiable as Mongoloid by skull (high cheekbones, except for some)
or so we find is good enough for forensics, where clues are important and advance certainty unnecessary.
We note that this responsible lecturer uses words such as "tends", and reminds us that it "is not possible to narrow down the identification to racial stock".
You are not going to be able to use such a system to back research into things like "intelligence". You're going to be conflating Thais with Navajos, and Papuans with Watusi, and trying to determine whether an average Thai/Navajo person has more "intelligence" than the average Papuan/Watusi.
It's a hopeless project.
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
What youre talking about here is the hybridization of the three major races, primarily in north america, not the races themselves according to their origins.
Of course this will continue in the future, making for a population that eventually resembles someone like Tiger Woods.
I am pointing out that the forensics you are relying on do not distinguish three equivalent genetic races - they don't even align well with the sociological races you are planning to easily test for "intelligence".carcano said:
And the main reason they are mostly useless (relevance, James) is probably that genetic diversity and "race" in the human species is concentrated near its origin in a region of environmental diversity - in Africa. This is common - genetic diversity of pine trees is greater in Mexico than in other places, for similar reasons http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...co+genetic+radiating&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=ca
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach..."genetic+diversity+"&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ca Humans have only had a little while to diversify outside of Africa, compared with the time inside of Africa - and few if any populations of humans have been genetically isolated for very long, since the African exodus.
It's as if you were to define the three major races of people as pigmies, Mongoloids with shovel incisors, and everyone else. You could tell them apart easily, just by their skulls, etc - but they wouldn't be equivalent categories for investigation of "intelligence", or much of anything else except growth hormone influence on dentition possibly.