Obama the White Man

[Strike For The South]

How has Barack Obama become black? He is what the census bureau would define as someone reporting two or more races as his father was an African immagrant and his mom was a white lady from Kansas. After his parents divorced he moved to Indonesia then Hawii where he graduated high school. The hardly compares with many if any of the 50 million blacks in the US even his father who was black had a complety diffrent experince seeing as he was well educated and coming from another country. Hawii Indonesia and Occedential all have low figures for African Americans Indonesia having nearly none. Hawii floating around the 2-3% range and Occidential having a nearly 80% cuacasion rate when Obama went there with many of the minorty spots being filled by Asians. So by the time he graduated college Obamas life experince was nothing like that of the poor rual Alabama farmer or the steel worker from Indiana. He was raised by his white mother and his white grandparents and people called him Barry. So why does black America see him as one of them when he really isnt. I dont know wether its a damn good pr job by his people or what but he sure has duped allot of people balck and white alike.

[FactionHeir]

I agree, he is not black, he is African American. In the literal sense :yes:

[Strike For The South]

I agree, he is not black, he is African American. In the literal sense :yes:

his father was he is not.

[FactionHeir]

Well, you didn't get my pun.
African. American. Get it?

[rory_20_uk]

For once someone who is "African American".

The term is not that helpful as everyone uses it to avoid "black" or "mixed race" for reasons I can't understand. Why are "Americans" white, and everyone else has to have a qualifier for them?

Duped people? The information is widely available. He's not hiding it. If people vote for someone based on the colour of skin they deserve to loose their rights to the vote.

~:smoking:

[Redleg]

Poor subject - one's background is only as important as one wants to make it. I perfer to judge who I vote for by what they have accomplished or not, versus what color their skin is or who their parents are.

Who cares that is mother was of European decent and his father was of African decent - he is still an American who meets the qualifications to run for President. Does that mean he is the best candidate for the job remains to be seen.

People who point to race as an issue are people I normally have problems with. His skin color could be purple or green for all I care. I want to know where he stands on issues, how he wants to steer the nation, and other important factors on running the country. Not some stupid standard about skin color and what race he is.

He is an American by birth - his parents come from different backgrounds, and he was raised in priviledge so has the Republican candidate been raised in priviledge.

[FactionHeir]

Normally it wouldn't be an issue, but he did bring it up quite a bit along the trail and show ads of his Kenyan relatives and his American relatives speak about him and the media continually putting him forward as the "black candidate" and "historical president" etc.
I guess people are drawn to sensationalism. And overall, people seem to vote by skin color as well. The minority voters anyway.

[Strike For The South]

Poor subject - one's background is only as important as one wants to make it. I perfer to judge who I vote for by what they have accomplished or not, versus what color their skin is or who their parents are.

Who cares that is mother was of European decent and his father was of African decent - he is still an American who meets the qualifications to run for President. Does that mean he is the best candidate for the job remains to be seen.

People who point to race as an issue are people I normally have problems with. His skin color could be purple or green for all I care. I want to know where he stands on issues, how he wants to steer the nation, and other important factors on running the country. Not some stupid standard about skin color and what race he is.

He is an American by birth - his parents come from different backgrounds, and he was raised in priviledge so has the Republican candidate been raised in priviledge.

The problem is he has made it in issue. He chooses not celebrate his diversity but panders by calming he is black. The problem is not his race it is his exploitation. The problem is people want to vote for the man simply becuase he is different not becuase of his polices. They seem him and thinks he can indentify with them but he cant.

[ICantSpellDawg]

If people can go around calling him "black" they can also go around calling him "white" with the same legitimacy. Obama wishes he was black, he has spent his entire adult life chasing that dream. I don't know what to think about that.

[rory_20_uk]

There are relatively few Americans of pure African descent. Invariably there is some "cream in the coffee" somewhere in the family history. Why shouldn't Obama join in?

~:smoking:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Most blacks i've met are clearly hybrids. Not too many whites, though - probably because we were never enslaved or legally raped by black slave masters

[Strike For The South]

There are relatively few Americans of pure African descent. Invariably there is some "cream in the coffee" somewhere in the family history. Why shouldn't Obama join in?

~:smoking:

The problem isnt his race it is his explotation of the poor minorites by claiming he knows what there going through when he doesnt know jack.

[Redleg]

The problem isnt his race it is his explotation of the poor minorites by claiming he knows what there going through when he doesnt know jack.

Then address his pandering of social status not his skin color. I understand that arguement not the one about the color of his skin.

[Lemur]

Race is a pretty flimsy construct no matter how you look at it, Strike. If some people are voting for Obama because they think he's black, I'm sure they will be counter-balanced by people who vote against him 'cause they think he's black.

As for the evil sneakiness of Obama claiming to be black, I'll just say that by the standards of usage in the USA, it's not unfair for him to call himself black. Well within the norms of language and custom.

[Louis VI the Fat]

How has Barack Obama become black? He is what the census bureau would define as someone reporting two or more races as his father was an African immagrant and his mom was a white lady from Kansas. After his parents divorced he moved to Indonesia then Hawii where he graduated high school. The hardly compares with many if any of the 50 million blacks in the US even his father who was black had a complety diffrent experince seeing as he was well educated and coming from another country. Hawii Indonesia and Occedential all have low figures for African Americans Indonesia having nearly none. Hawii floating around the 2-3% range and Occidential having a nearly 80% cuacasion rate when Obama went there with many of the minorty spots being filled by Asians. So by the time he graduated college Obamas life experince was nothing like that of the poor rual Alabama farmer or the steel worker from Indiana. He was raised by his white mother and his white grandparents and people called him Barry. So why does black America see him as one of them when he really isnt. I dont know wether its a damn good pr job by his people or what but he sure has duped allot of people balck and white alike.How about 300 years of 'single drop of blood' policy? One drop = black. Indiscriminately. As the etnic map of America becomes ever more intricate, so the sillyness of it only increases.
What's funny though, is that Barack is probably etnically closer related to average Afro-Americans through his white mother's side, than through his Kenyan father's side. ~;)

Also, I know green-eyed North Africans, and there are near black Middle-Easterners too. What would they be if they emigrated to America? African-American and Asian respectively? The reverse - the African would be white and the Asian black? :smash:

There are almost two points in your post. Apart from his etnic roots, you repeat the oft heard point that Obama grew up in a somewhat succesful, middle-class environment and therefore lacks the 'black' experience. Well some whites did not grow up as priviliged as Bush did, which somehow does not mean they don't share a heritage with him either. And similarly, some blacks grow up in middle-class conditions. Which does not make them less black. (No matter how much the victim industry wants to perpetuate poverty by defining black as underpriviliged)

And in our hearts, we are all orange. :2thumbsup:

[rory_20_uk]

The problem isnt his race it is his explotation of the poor minorites by claiming he knows what there going through when he doesnt know jack.

Which recent President does?

~:smoking:

[Beirut]

Nice quote, SFTS.

A smaller font might look classier, though. :toff:

[Strike For The South]

Then address his pandering of social status not his skin color. I understand that arguement not the one about the color of his skin.

But he uses his race as his breadwinner. Im not saying its bad hes black or white or any color. Im saying he isnt what he presents himslef as and the public seems to slurp it up without reasearch or question. I DONT CARE ABOUT THE MANS SKIN

[Louis VI the Fat]

Nice quote, SFTS.

A smaller font might look classier, though. :toff:
Smaller = classier? You're talking to a Texan here! Size determines class to them. :laugh4:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

But he uses his race as his breadwinner.

What are you referring to specifically?


He's black in the sense that racists don't care if one of your parents was white. Historically mixed race people have been discriminated against just as much as unmixed, so his nomination is historical. Duh.

[Tribesman]

Smaller = classier? You're talking to a Texan here! Size determines class to them.
Would that mean that a texan who was so fat that his house had its chassis collapse could be viewed as their equivalent of royalty ?

[Reverend Joe]

Who cares? If the man wants to consider himself black, I don't give a damn. Besides, I'm pretty sure he hasn't said that. He even said, to an NBC news camera, that Obama is one asterisk away from being an irish name.

[Tribesman]

He even said, to an NBC news camera, that Obama is one asterisk away from being an irish name.
But Obama is Irish , he is a narrowback of the biffo flavour:2thumbsup:

[Strike For The South]

My main problem is this. The man claims to be new and diffrent when he is just more of the same lying cheating Washington we know. So why are people drawn to him?

[Lemur]

Mebbe 'cause after the last seven years, a competent, charismatic, non-ideologue sounds like gold?

[Strike For The South]

Mebbe 'cause after the last seven years, a competent, charismatic, non-ideologue sounds like gold?

but he is just more of the same...

[Goofball]

That's what I like about McCain: Absolutely no ambiguity there. He is without a doubt one if the whitest guys in the world...

[Lemur]

but he is just more of the same...
So competence is a non-factor when it comes to governing?

[Strike For The South]

That's what I like about McCain: Absolutely no ambiguity there. He is without a doubt one if the whitest guys in the world...

Skin color is not the issue here.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

but he is just more of the same...

Bush:conservative
Obama:liberal

sfts says: same thing!

:dizzy2:

[Xiahou]

Race is a pretty flimsy construct no matter how you look at it, Strike. If some people are voting for Obama because they think he's black, I'm sure they will be counter-balanced by people who vote against him 'cause they think he's black.And both groups should be criticized for doing so. Either way, it stinks of racism.

[Strike For The South]

Bush:conservative
Obama:liberal

sfts says: same thing!

:dizzy2:

If you think he will come in and do anything diffrent for this country you are wrong. He will pull our boys out of a widly unpopular conflict. Which with the pickle were in may or may not be the best thing. All he will do is spend spend spend without looking at any real tangible soultions. He will simply promise healthcare and peace when in reality those things may be worse for us. There all the same and to say Obama is about hope is asinine thats what this is about it is about a man claiming to be diffrent when in reality he is more of the same. Thats why he panders to the black vote and claims moral high ground when he isnt any diffrent at all. I guess some people will always be swayed by white teeth and sensationalist remarks.

[Geoffrey S]

Sad, that being of a particular race somehow implies being less or more of part of a nation.

[PanzerJaeger]

\


He's black in the sense that racists don't care if one of your parents was white.

Wait. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Racists define ethnicity now? :inquisitive:

[Geoffrey S]

Who else would? What worth does it have, to claim the someone is 50% black, 25% hispanic and 25% white? What can that possibly mean?

[CountArach]

Who else would? What worth does it have, to claim the someone is 50% black, 25% hispanic and 25% white? What can that possibly mean?
Exactly. Races are only different if you let people define what a race is. If you remove skin colour what is the difference?

[PanzerJaeger]

Exactly. Races are only different if you let people define what a race is. If you remove skin colour what is the difference?

Excluding differences in IQ, not much.

[CountArach]

Excluding differences in IQ, not much.
I'm struggling to find how that isn't racist.

[Tribesman]

Wait. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Racists define ethnicity now?
Yes they do , have a look at some of those nice errrr....reliable links Mars provided in the other topic , there are only five races and anyone that has any mixture of them just doesn't belong :yes:

[PanzerJaeger]

I'm struggling to find how that isn't racist.

Facts are suddenly racist?

Im sorry. We're all exactly the same. Stupid science...

[seireikhaan]

Facts are suddenly racist?

Im sorry. We're all exactly the same. Stupid science...
Would you mind presenting some facts, then? Some verefiable evidence to support your claim?

[PanzerJaeger]

Would you mind presenting some facts, then? Some verefiable evidence to support your claim?

Is this not common knowledge? The reason for the differences has been debated for years...A simple wiki will get you started.



Cumulative IQ gaps by race or ethnicity based on 1981 U.S. distributions. According to these findings, WAIS IQs for Whites (mean = 101.4, SD = 14.7) were higher than those for Blacks (mean = 86.9, SD = 13.0); distributions for Hispanics (mean = 91), East Asians (mean = 106), and Ashkenazi Jews (mean = 112-115) are less precise because of overlap and small sample size. The modern debate focuses on what causes these disparities in average IQ. Based on Reynolds et al. 1987, p. 330.




Socioeconomic status (SES) varies both between and within populations, but Black-White differences in IQ persist among the children of parents matched for SES, and the gap is largest among the children of wealthiest and best educated parents.[97]

[Tribesman]

Is this not common knowledge? The reason for the differences has been debated for years..
And is still being debated and has not been settled so it isn't a fact is it , its a disputed theory:idea2:

[PanzerJaeger]

And is still being debated and has not been settled so it isn't a fact is it , its a disputed theory:idea2:

No sir. I am afraid you're wrong. The differences in IQ measurements are well documented scientific facts, the reasons for those differences are theoretical. :bow:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

No sir. I am afraid you're wrong. The differences in IQ measurements are well documented scientific facts, the reasons for those differences are theoretical. :bow:

No, you're wrong. It hasn't been shown that IQ is different, measured IQ is different. The measurement system has been said to be faulty.

[PanzerJaeger]

No, you're wrong. It hasn't been shown that IQ is different, measured IQ is different. The measurement system has been said to be faulty.

Sorry, but that is not the general concensus.


While the existence of average IQ test score differences has been a matter of accepted fact for decades, a great deal of controversy exists among scholars over the question of whether these score differences reflected real differences in cognitive ability. Some claim that there is no evidence for test bias since IQ tests are equally good predictors of IQ-related factors (such as school performance) for U.S. Blacks and Whites.[165] The performance differences persist in tests and testing situations in which care has been taken to eliminate bias.[165] It has also been suggested that IQ tests are formulated in such a way as to disadvantage minorities.[165] Controlled studies have shown that test construction does not substantially contribute to the IQ gap.[165] However, some psychometricians are not satisfied that the question of test bias is fully answered by these results.[166][167][168] Also, all commenters reject the common misconception that IQ is meant to measure "innate" differences in intelligence, and they agree that average IQ scores on their own say nothing about the cause of the differences.

The preponderance of evidence indicates that IQ tests measuring general intelligence are crossculturally valid. There is little or no evidence of population-specific cultural effects apart from the obvious example of language bias.[169] For example, Robert Sternberg et al. found that the IQ of 12- to 15-year-old Kenyans predicted school grades at about the same level as they do in the West.[170] IQ also predicted university performance equally well in African and non-African engineering students in South Africa in a 2004 study.[171] Salgado et al. (2003) demonstrated the international generalizability of general mental ability across 10 member countries of the European Community and differences in a nation’s culture, religion, language, socioeconomic level or employment legislation did not affect the predictive validity of IQ tests.[172]

[CountArach]

It doesn't take into account economic difficulties felt by blacks and Hispanics, which means that a lower level of education is achievable. Hence their IQ suffers.

[PanzerJaeger]

It doesn't take into account economic difficulties felt by blacks and Hispanics, which means that a lower level of education is achievable. Hence their IQ suffers.

Well... yes and no, mostly no. :shrug:


Socioeconomic status (SES) varies both between and within populations, but Black-White differences in IQ persist among the children of parents matched for SES, and the gap is largest among the children of wealthiest and best educated parents.[97]

[m52nickerson]

If you think he will come in and do anything diffrent for this country you are wrong. He will pull our boys out of a widly unpopular conflict. Which with the pickle were in may or may not be the best thing. All he will do is spend spend spend without looking at any real tangible soultions. He will simply promise healthcare and peace when in reality those things may be worse for us. There all the same and to say Obama is about hope is asinine thats what this is about it is about a man claiming to be diffrent when in reality he is more of the same. Thats why he panders to the black vote and claims moral high ground when he isnt any diffrent at all. I guess some people will always be swayed by white teeth and sensationalist remarks.

So pull out of a war that is costing us billions of dollars will not help?

No tangible solutions? An energy policy that would start weening us off foreign oil is not tangible?

Health care and peace are bad things?

So the fact that all most all of his campaign money comes from small donations instead of large corporations or the rich is not different?

All this plus the fact that saying all politician are the same ignores the fact that under 8 year with a democratic president we had a huge economic boom and increased the quality of life in this county. Then under 7 1/2 years under a republic president, gas is over now $4 a gallon, we are approaching or are in a recession, and the dollar is so weak it not funny.

Yup, all politician are the same.

[Strike For The South]

So pull out of a war that is costing us billions of dollars will not help?

No tangible solutions? An energy policy that would start weening us off foreign oil is not tangible?

Health care and peace are bad things?

So the fact that all most all of his campaign money comes from small donations instead of large corporations or the rich is not different?

All this plus the fact that saying all politician are the same ignores the fact that under 8 year with a democratic president we had a huge economic boom and increased the quality of life in this county. Then under 7 1/2 years under a republic president, gas is over now $4 a gallon, we are approaching or are in a recession, and the dollar is so weak it not funny.

Yup, all politician are the same.

/this is exactly what Im talking about. Obama has taken millions from lobbyists and PACs look it up yourself. Do you understand why gas is going up? its simple supply and demand China and Indias need for oil has grown exponentially over the past couple of years. The more people that want your product the higher the price tag. Your soultion to health care is to throw money at it? how do you know that system would be better its not. Completly pulling out of Iraq now may disastouras consequences. Obama sees the fedral goverment as the soultion to everything so did FDR and his effects on the econmy are still being felt for the worse today.

[m52nickerson]

/this is exactly what Im talking about. Obama has taken millions from lobbyists and PACs look it up yourself.

ORELY - http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?id=N00009638


Do you understand why gas is going up? its simple supply and demand China and Indias need for oil has grown exponentially over the past couple of years. The more people that want your product the higher the price tag.

That is part of it, but you don't think that an unjust war in Iraq has some affect? What about the weak US dollar? What about the fact that the current administration has not done anything to reduce our need for foreign oil? Anyone who looked at world economics knew that the demand for oil was going to rise sharply.


Your soultion to health care is to throw money at it? how do you know that system would be better its not.

Obama's plan is more than simply throwing money at it. From the horses mouth - http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/


Completly pulling out of Iraq now may disastouras consequences.

You mean like saving US lives, and money, and forcing the Iraq government to do something.


Obama sees the fedral goverment as the soultion to everything so did FDR and his effects on the econmy are still being felt for the worse today.

You mean Franklin Delano Roosevelt who pulled us out of the Great Depression, was so popular he was voted in for three terms, and got us through the biggest war in history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt

Perhaps instead of shooting from the hip, you should do some research first.

[Strike For The South]

ORELY - http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?id=N00009638



That is part of it, but you don't think that an unjust war in Iraq has some affect? What about the weak US dollar? What about the fact that the current administration has not done anything to reduce our need for foreign oil? Anyone who looked at world economics knew that the demand for oil was going to rise sharply.



Obama's plan is more than simply throwing money at it. From the horses mouth - http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/



You mean like saving US lives, and money, and forcing the Iraq government to do something.



You mean Franklin Delano Roosevelt who pulled us out of the Great Depression, was so popular he was voted in for three terms, and got us through the biggest war in history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt

Perhaps instead of shooting from the hip, you should do some research first.

I will cede the his campagin contributions however do you realize how hard it is to get viable energy and mass produce like we have done with crude oil? The sheer cost of begining such a project makes me shudder. We need to get off it we just cant start throwing cash at it. A national health care system will do more harm than good and cost the average joe more money. Leaving Iraq will kill many more people the fact of the matter is the Iraqi goverment is in no position to "do something" right now and we need to face that. FDR started defict spending and created and artifical market with his new deal his economic policies are the reason our economy has a crippiling defict. To often people look at the short term and neglect the long term. Health care the economy energy they are all pressing issues however we need long term not short term soultions.



Perhaps instead of shooting from the hip, you should do some research first

I don't think that far ahead.

[Tribesman]

Sorry, but that is not the general concensus.

Hey panzer,that source you are using for your cut and pastes , it wouldn't happen to have little big warning headings concerning accuracy neutrality and unverified claims covering the whole article would it:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Not a very good start if you want to claim facts and consensus is it:oops:

Now you could ofcourse follow the links to the scientists statements where they give their views on the subject , but for every one of those that agree there is one that disagrees and a whole pile who sit between the two , not exactly a general consensus like is it:yes:

[Ice]

Bush:conservative
Obama:liberal

sfts says: same thing!

:dizzy2:

didnt say the president

if you haven't noticed, a lot of Obama likes are sitting in congress

[PanzerJaeger]

This is pretty much SOC101 material man. We don't have to use Wiki, though. I just thought the footnotes offered a good starting point. What would you consider an accurate source?




Now you could ofcourse follow the links to the scientists statements where they give their views on the subject , but for every one of those that agree there is one that disagrees and a whole pile who sit between the two , not exactly a general consensus like is it:yes:

That simply is not accurate. There is a vocal minority that has asserted that the tests are biased, but no basis for these claims has been made. On the other hand, great efforts have been made to assure the tests are not biased, and the results have been the same. Note the socioeconomic comparisons.

The debate is over why black people consistently score worse than whites and asians. I'm sure if you're at all familiar with the discussion, you know of the genetic versus environmental camps.

[m52nickerson]

I will cede the his campagin contributions however do you realize how hard it is to get viable energy and mass produce like we have done with crude oil? The sheer cost of begining such a project makes me shudder. We need to get off it we just cant start throwing cash at it.

A mandate that new home be "greener" then normal to help reduce energy use which is 90% petroleum based, would only adds only 5 to 8% to the homes cost. http://www.eco-smart.org/presentations/1-6Keys+11pp-overviews.pdf

How about forcing new cars purchased in the US to be more fuel efferent. The 2008 Honda Civic Hybrid cost $22,600 and gets 47city/ 48 hwy.

Not a scary start.


A national health care system will do more harm than good and cost the average joe more money.

Did you read Obama's plan? He has five ways in which his plan would lower costs.


Leaving Iraq will kill many more people the fact of the matter is the Iraqi goverment is in no position to "do something" right now and we need to face that.

You do know that Obama would not pull all of the troops out at one time. A slow withdraw would force the Iraq government to move forward. With us setting there with no plans on leaving they have no reason to do anything.

If we stay in Iraq for a long period of time, how long do you think our volunteer army will last? A draft in this country would not be a good thing.


FDR started defict spending and created and artifical market with his new deal his economic policies are the reason our economy has a crippiling defict.

Which got us out of a Depression, and feed people, and gave them jobs. Plus the Republicans who believe in "less government" have always added more to the deficithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms


To often people look at the short term and neglect the long term. Health care the economy energy they are all pressing issues however we need long term not short term soultions.

Getting off oil will not have a long term benefit? Creating a system that will get more people health care will not help in the long term?


I don't think that far ahead.

That is why you seem uninformed and are losing this debate.



Exactly. Races are only different if you let people define what a race is. If you remove skin colour what is the difference?


Excluding differences in IQ, not much.


I'm struggling to find how that isn't racist.


Facts are suddenly racist?

Im sorry. We're all exactly the same. Stupid science...

Well since I submitted your original quote to Racists Say the Darndest Things! - http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/Default.aspx?archive=2 we will see if it gets approved and added to the quotes.

[Ironside]

That simply is not accurate. There is a vocal minority that has asserted that the tests are biased, but no basis for these claims has been made. On the other hand, great efforts have been made to assure the tests are not biased, and the results have been the same. Note the socioeconomic comparisons.

The debate is over why black people consistently score worse than whites and asians. I'm sure if you're at all familiar with the discussion, you know of the genetic versus environmental camps.

If we would presume this is true, the further question would be how much it matter? Considering that the in-group variation is much larger than the between group variation, I would say quite little.

[Odin]

I'm sure if you're at all familiar with the discussion, you know of the genetic versus environmental camps.

Well yes PJ you have a fair point here, it does come down to the genetic vs environmental camps. I happen to be in the environmental camp myself, but thats the silly idealist in me I have tried to kill for years. You know, lets take people of different ethnicity from equal socio economic backrounds and see how they compare.

Intresting discussion thus far, until you made this distinction I was decidely unintrested in the back and forths, but you've managed to list the one factor that might support your assertions.

Thats assuming you fall into the environmental camp :wiseguy:

[Banquo's Ghost]

Hey, PJ lookee here (http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=402381&c=2). More really top-grade science that proves those who believe in God are stupider than atheists. IQ tests prove it, you see.

As an on-topic example with which you will surely agree, we can use the Reverend Wright; who is both Christian and black, and therefore so dumb the thesis must be true for all cases.

:stupido2:

[Xiahou]

Hey, PJ lookee here (http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=402381&c=2). More really top-grade science that proves those who believe in God are stupider than atheists. IQ tests prove it, you see.

As an on-topic example with which you will surely agree, we can use the Reverend Wright; who is both Christian and black, and therefore so dumb the thesis must be true for all cases.

:stupido2:Is that a strawman or a red herring? I'm not sure which. Regardless, I think you could probably do better.


If we would presume this is true, the further question would be how much it matter? Considering that the in-group variation is much larger than the between group variation, I would say quite little.I agree. I think any differences are largely irrelevant as anything more than an academic curiosity. In terms of real world applicability, I don't see any. :shrug:

[Fragony]

All that matters is that a black man can actually run for president. It's still intact, don't think that would be possible here.

[Geoffrey S]

Edit: Fragony, I agree. I hear a lot of people here (ie., student-infested Leiden) who seem to take the reluctance to vote for Obama among many Americans as some sort of proof of inherent racism of some kind. But really, I don't see the Dutch voting a member of an ethnic minority into Het Torentje anytime soon. And considering how immature the Dutch approach to actually integrating said minorities into this state, this nation, is at the moment that's probably for the best.

But that belongs more in Adrian's topic. Really must type something coherent for that soon.

Is that a strawman or a red herring? I'm not sure which. Regardless, I think you could probably do better.
Looked like a polite way for BG to express the height his opinion of the information Panzer linked to.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Even if these differences in IQ exist, which I will not pass judgement on here, they are, in my opinion, irrelevant.

[Divinus Arma]

Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?

Obama is a rich white man.


https://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7283/arugulawd9.jpg (https://imageshack.us)

[PanzerJaeger]

Well since I submitted your original quote to Racists Say the Darndest Things! - http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/Default.aspx?archive=2 we will see if it gets approved and added to the quotes.

You've got quite a bit of free time on your hands, don't you? The joke's on you though, unfortunately, as the test results are well documented.


If we would presume this is true, the further question would be how much it matter?

Utility is always a questionable arguement. In any event, importance is in the eye of the beholder.


Well yes PJ you have a fair point here, it does come down to the genetic vs environmental camps. I happen to be in the environmental camp myself, but thats the silly idealist in me I have tried to kill for years. You know, lets take people of different ethnicity from equal socio economic backrounds and see how they compare.

Intresting discussion thus far, until you made this distinction I was decidely unintrested in the back and forths, but you've managed to list the one factor that might support your assertions.

Thats assuming you fall into the environmental camp

My opinion is about as important as these IQ test results. I simply enjoy seeing people's reactions when this subject is brought up, especially from those who enjoy mocking people who believe in intelligent design. Suddenly science doesn't agree with their ideology.

The simple mentioning of some basic IQ measurements sends certain people into fits. Accusations of racism, dismissal of documented science, etc. fly. Its devious, but oh so funny. :laugh4:

You may want to look at the studies that compare children of the same socioeconomic backgrounds though. ;)


Hey, PJ lookee here. More really top-grade science that proves those who believe in God are stupider than atheists. IQ tests prove it, you see.

As an on-topic example with which you will surely agree, we can use the Reverend Wright; who is both Christian and black, and therefore so dumb the thesis must be true for all cases.

Calm down Mr. Ghost. I have no love of religion so you may want to withdraw and strike from a different angle. Good try though. :bow:

[Slyspy]

My opinion is about as important as these IQ test results. I simply enjoy seeing people's reactions when this subject is brought up, especially from those who enjoy mocking people who believe in intelligent design. Suddenly science doesn't agree with their ideology.

Eh?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

My opinion is about as important as these IQ test results. I simply enjoy seeing people's reactions when this subject is brought up, especially from those who enjoy mocking people who believe in intelligent design. Suddenly science doesn't agree with their ideology.

The simple mentioning of some basic IQ measurements sends certain people into fits. Accusations of racism, dismissal of documented science, etc. fly. Its devious, but oh so funny.

So you were trolling ~;)

[PBI]

My opinion is about as important as these IQ test results. I simply enjoy seeing people's reactions when this subject is brought up, especially from those who enjoy mocking people who believe in intelligent design. Suddenly science doesn't agree with their ideology.

There's a word for that. It's called trolling.

Not really something to boast about, PJ

[Tribesman]

Calm down Mr. Ghost. I have no love of religion so you may want to withdraw and strike from a different angle.
Hey Panzer its the same angle , disputed findings from IQ tests by scientists :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Edit: Fragony, I agree. I hear a lot of people here (ie., student-infested Leiden) who seem to take the reluctance to vote for Obama among many Americans as some sort of proof of inherent racism of some kind. But really, I don't see the Dutch voting a member of an ethnic minority into Het Torentje anytime soon.

But that belongs more in Adrian's topic. Really must type something coherent for that soon.Please do! In a nutshell, in the above quote you have exposed much of what's so unbearably wrong with anti-Americanism - all the thick ignorance of Europeans who see fit to lecture American over subjects in which the US in reality owns Europe.


I had a clear preference for Clinton. As such, I do not applaude Obama's candidacy. However, I do think it is simply marvellous that a minority candidate has a real shot at the presidency. America owns.

[CountArach]

Well since I submitted your original quote to Racists Say the Darndest Things! - http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/Default.aspx?archive=2 we will see if it gets approved and added to the quotes.
It's up there :wink:

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

It's up there :wink:

Not only does that give a bad name to the .ORG by having the link to this site up there, but it completely ignores his actual argument.

Smooth. :rolleyes:

[m52nickerson]

You've got quite a bit of free time on your hands, don't you? The joke's on you though, unfortunately, as the test results are well documented.

CountArach, Ironside and other did a great job at pointing out that the study you are referring to is a bunch of crap. That and if you knew anything about science you would understand that one study does not evidence make.

...and it took about a minute to submit your response.


Utility is always a questionable arguement. In any event, importance is in the eye of the beholder.

Correct, intelligent people do not find race important, only fools do.



My opinion is about as important as these IQ test results. I simply enjoy seeing people's reactions when this subject is brought up, especially from those who enjoy mocking people who believe in intelligent design. Suddenly science doesn't agree with their ideology.

Again if you knew anything about science you would understand that Intelligent Design is not science. Link-n-Learn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method


The simple mentioning of some basic IQ measurements sends certain people into fits. Accusations of racism, dismissal of documented science, etc. fly. Its devious, but oh so funny.

That is because uninformed people spewing crap tends to get people upset.


Not only does that give a bad name to the .ORG by having the link to this site up there, but it completely ignores his actual argument.

Smooth. :rolleyes:

No it gives PanzerJaeger a bad name. There is also a link back to the thread.
....then again if it looks like a duck, and quack likes a duck, PanzerJaeger's comment is racist.

Now I have to go for a minute and see your quote on RSTDT.

Oh and PanzerJaeger your post about Obama's lies found here https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1944394&postcount=117
Snopes disagrees with you!
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

No it gives PanzerJaeger a bad name. There is also a link back to the thread.


It's really still quite immature in my humble opinion, but I'll leave it be.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

That is part of it, but you don't think that an unjust war in Iraq has some affect? What about the weak US dollar? What about the fact that the current administration has not done anything to reduce our need for foreign oil? Anyone who looked at world economics knew that the demand for oil was going to rise sharply.

Actually, I would suggest that the war in Iraq was far more "just" than it has been (at least until recently) well managed. Nor do I believe that Iraqi oil, which is now pumping at nearly pre Iraqi Freedom levels, is vital difference. The weak US dollar accounts for a good slice of the recent cost increase per barrel, as does the increased demand for oil worldwide. The single biggest factor, however, is OPEC. Since 1973, world population has increase by more than a third, and oil consumption has gone up even faster (roughly 50%). While most other producers are pumping nearly 50% more oil than 35 years ago, OPEC is pumping less than 5% more. As a semi-monopoly, they get to smile and _____ us, no doubt while kindly offering to use petroleum jelly to ease things.


You mean like saving US lives, and money, and forcing the Iraq government to do something.

I'm not sure that a US pullback, "Iraqization," will truly have them stepping up to the bar the way they'd need to. With us taking lumps for them and providing stability (which we are, at last, with better resources and focus) they may actually develop something approaching stability using a three-state with "federal" umbrella approach -- which is the way it is trending. Without the USA, I think you'd see a splintering (and possibly out-and-out civil war). Of course, critics of everything Bush still presume that such a civil conflict was and is the only possible result and view the last 18 months as only a temporary fig-leafing of the problem.



You mean Franklin Delano Roosevelt who pulled us out of the Great Depression, was so popular he was voted in for three terms, and got us through the biggest war in history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt.

Ahh...the sacred myth of the almighty FDR. An effective war leader he was. His decision to employ the navy in the Atlantic in support of England in early 1941 helped turn the tide in the Battle of the Atlantic and his pressure on Japan virtually guaranteed a U.S.-Japanese conflict. He and Churchill must both have done a jig when Hitler was idiotic enough to declare war and let them do their "Germany First" plan as they desired. In many ways it was a good decision. Roosevelt feared a Nazi-dominated Europe on many levels -- and rightly so.

Economically, the New Deal had far less impact than it did psychologically -- which is not unimportant, I admit -- the world economy had actually hit its bottom just prior to FDR taking office and was already beginning the slow climb back. FDR's "miracle" was simple Keynesianism and many of his regulatory efforts were rolled back in the 1970's and 1980's as too restrictive of the economy. World War II ended the Great Depression by removing a lot of the surplus workforce from existence while encouraging a resurgence of trade.

That FDR was popular is undoubtable. That he was a powerful leader who re-shaped the USA is beyond question. A lot of the impact thereof is very much debatable.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Is that a strawman or a red herring? I'm not sure which. Regardless, I think you could probably do better.

It's whatever you want it to be and less.

I was only trying to point out that there's a lot of silly science out there on the subject of IQ and correlations to assorted groups that people want to belittle.

[PanzerJaeger]

Ah Mr. Nickerson, you remind me so much of myself about four years ago. You've convinced yourself that you know how the world should be, and those that disagree with you are not simply wrong, but evil. Therefore, in your mind you are completely justified in being such a.. what’s a polite term for :daisy:?

Its ok though. If you stick around long enough, you may well develop a certain respect, even camaraderie, with even those whose worldviews are completely opposite of your own. :bow:

As to your zingers...


CountArach, Ironside and other did a great job at pointing out that the study you are referring to is a bunch of crap. That and if you knew anything about science you would understand that one study does not evidence make.

You may have missed it, but as others have pointed out, my posting in this thread was more of a game I've been playing with myself for my own personal amusement, or in other words, trolling. Its a nasty habit and I do apologize, but hopefully it has opened some people's eyes.

What I posted was not the result of one study, but an amalgamation of countless studies conducted over multiple decades. Black people consistently score lower on average than white people, even when care is taken to avoid bias and match socioeconomic conditions. In fact, the difference grows as the subject's respective socioeconomic situation increases.

The real question, as I said before, is: why does this occur? Is it genetic? Is it environmental? And more importantly, does it matter? Instead of addressing these questions, you've lashed out at myself, and the information itself.

When you begin to dismiss valid scientific research in order to preserve your own ideology, you may want to have a long look in the mirror. How different are you from those Intelligent Designers?



Correct, intelligent people do not find race important, only fools do.

Intelligent people learn to read between the lines.


Again if you knew anything about science you would understand that Intelligent Design is not science. Link-n-Learn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

In your zealous fervor, you've failed to take a hint - or even read what I've written.


I have no love of religion

You see, you have created this archetype of a bible-thumping, right wing, bigot from Kansas in your head without any real knowledge of where I stand. Try agnostic fascist with a distinct admiration for the Jewish people and Israel. Does that blow your mind?

The irony of using Wiki as a source is not lost on me. :beam:



That is because uninformed people spewing crap tends to get people upset.

Ah, but what I posted were documented IQ test results reflecting years of research. Who is uninformed here?




....then again if it looks like a duck, and quack likes a duck, PanzerJaeger's comment is racist.

My comment was simply data.. information without any opinion attached. The value of that information is debatable, but the purpose of posting it was to illicit a certain response. Thus far, you've demonstrated exactly what I intended to show; hook, line, and sinker.


Oh and PanzerJaeger your post about Obama's lies found here https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1944394&postcount=117
Snopes disagrees with you!
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

The anger is almost tangible. I love it.

Put down your sword and read my post again. Did I write that? Thanks for the information, though. :2thumbsup:

[Fragony]

Kinda funny how those who get so worked up over things like this insist on viewing IQ as a degree of worthyness, usually smart people. If you have a lower IQ you aren't any less a person.

[Adrian II]

It's whatever you want it to be and less.

I was only trying to point out that there's a lot of silly science out there on the subject of IQ and correlations to assorted groups that people want to belittle.On the contrary, there is a lot of silly, uninformed and deeply biased opposition against IQ research. I remember that in the run-up to the publication of The Bell Curve in 1994, the book got six firmly negative reviews in major American media (I recall Time and The Washington Post being among them) from prominent Psychologists - none of whom had read the book, because it wasn't out yet and they based themselves on hearsay about its contents. A stark example of the dogged commitment of established journalism and academic Psychology to their own prejudice and anti-scientific bias.

Even today I keep reading academic summaries and reviews of The Bell Curve from Psychologists who have not read the book, and I know because I am one of the very few Dutch journalists who have actually read it. This is one of the reason why I have no respect whatsoever for modern Psychology as a profession or a science, and very little for journalism as a serious profession. And if a Wiki site on IQ is held to be 'controversial' by some Wiki contributors I really couldn't care less.

[Fragony]

Man how did you manage to actually read that it's so dry [insert sleeping smily]

[Strike For The South]

yall are foucused on the forrest when you should really be concerend about single trees.

[Adrian II]

Man how did you manage to actually read that it's so dry [insert sleeping smily]Took me a whole week. And I consulted a statistician on the graphs, particularly the factor analysis. The typical sign of a non-reader who passes judgment on this book it that he/she assumes it is about the question whether IQ is hereditary. It is not. It is about the social consequences of IQ differences, and that makes it fascinating.

[Fragony]

lol sounds like it's really a pc adapt's dream come true then. First read then cry or you might find yourselve riding against the wrong legs :laugh4:

silly people :yes:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Little talk of Obama anymore in this thread. Might as well chime in on the off-topic discussion then.

I am not sure I share Panzer's political views or intentions with this subject, but he is neither a fool nor uninformed about this subject. Ridicule and outrage are not going to cut it. He is quite right in most of his assertions.

Man, like all other species, is subject to evolutionary laws. The idea that the human mind is somehow exempt from evolutionary impulses is pseudo-science. A socially convenient taboo. Indeed, the comparison with Intelligent Design believers was well chosen.

I think the idea that cognitive abilities are evenly spread throughout all groups of humans is completely at odds with everything we know about evolution and the history of the human species.
Panzer linked to inductive studies to prove his point. That is, studies where people are defined into groups and tested for IQs. This brings about a lot of problems, for a start, race and IQ are contentious concepts. Plus, more worryingly, both have been subjected to a heavily politicized scientific history, rife with pseudo-science. But even though Panzer's psychological studies are problematic, they are not without merit.

There is also a less politicised, more straightforward biological approach. By deductive reasoning, groups of humans have lived in varying degrees of isolation for varying amounts of time. Much is unclear about human palaeology, but what is clear is that the isolation and amount of time has been sufficient for humans to evolve into widely varying groups. Susceptibility to diseases, facial features, body types - in all aspects human groups have become biologically adapted to varying environments. None of these studies are ever disputed.

The brain, too, is simply an organ. Sucseptible to evolutionary impulses like all the other organs. The idea that evolutionary change of the human brain somehow stopped roughly 70 thousand years ago is preposterous. It is not science, it is not grounded in fact. It is rather grounded in the Christian concept of man as a created, unchangeable being, and, especially after WWII, in fear for social consequences, combined with a residu, a post-Christian concept of the human being and mind.

Cognitive abilities are at least partially heriditary. Whatever is heriditary is subjected to evolutionary impulses. Human groups have been subjected to different evolutionary impulses. Hence, the prediction is that varying human groups have varying cognitive abilities. A prediction, that seems to be confirmed by psychological studies.
No amount of PC, social constructs and definitions, clever attacks on psychological studies or politicised science is going to change this simple truth.

[Lemur]

You may have missed it, but as others have pointed out, my posting in this thread was more of a game I've been playing with myself for my own personal amusement, or in other words, trolling. Its a nasty habit and I do apologize, but hopefully it has opened some people's eyes.
Yes, PJ, you've learned how to indicate racism in a number of ways without actually verging into explicit statement. It's quite the little dance you do.


In your zealous fervor, you've failed to take a hint - or even read what I've written.
You're also becoming quite proficient at indicating disdain and arrogance. Between this and the obliquely-indicated racism, you're going to be quite a hit in polite society.


Try agnostic fascist with a distinct admiration for the Jewish people and Israel. Does that blow your mind?
Why should it? Most extreme rightwing people in the U.S. are pro-Israel these days. It's not an original or unique position, and barely deserves comment. The fact that you manage to be a practicing fascist without being an anti-Semite is not terribly interesting, no matter how much you congratulate yourself.


My comment was simply data.. information without any opinion attached. The value of that information is debatable, but the purpose of posting it was to illicit a certain response. Thus far, you've demonstrated exactly what I intended to show; hook, line, and sinker.
For a guy who adopts such a superior attitude when responding to people who are justifiably angry at your realistic and convincing imitation of a racist, you really ought to know the difference between "elicit" and "illicit." And what kind of classy dude gloats about having trolled someone else into anger? What kind of contribution are you looking to make? "Look, ma, when I imitate a racist jerk, people get angry! Aren't I clever and educational?"


The anger is almost tangible. I love it.
Then what the hell is wrong with you?


Put down your sword and read my post again. Did I write that?
You posted 46 of those 50 lies in another thread. Are you suggesting you didn't, or are you engaging in your new favorite hobby, trolling and lying until people get angry at you? Lovely habit you have there.

[Incongruous]

The best thing, I think, is just the way some people respond to him. I love it when people pretend that the fact he is half Kenyan does not influence them. Of coarse it does, America having a black president would be an event comparable to the Reformation. I am not endorsing him, but for him to be elected would most definatley take the wind out of all America's and even the West's critics. You would have given a massive middle finger to all the prats who I share my uni with that think Amricans are all in some way racists imperialists, and all the rest like them across the world.
It would be great.

Unfortunatley I do not agree with selling the Iraqi people off short for the sake of saving money, but I am being idealistic there.

[Adrian II]

We now have Social Groups, Friends Groups, and other social contact thingies. All very nice, but can't we just have a Boxing Ring for mad Orgahs? I'd like to bet on a Lemur-Panzer fight over twelve rounds..

[Odin]

We now have Social Groups, Friends Groups, and other social contact thingies. All very nice, but can't we just have a Boxing Ring for mad Orgahs? I'd like to bet on a Lemur-Panzer fight over twelve rounds..

Sign me up, can I pick my opponent? :thumbsup:

oh, 20.00 on Lemur as long as PJ cant use his firearms. :wiseguy:

[Fragony]

The best thing, I think, is just the way some people respond to him. I love it when people pretend that the fact he is half Kenyan does not influence them. Of coarse it does, America having a black president would be an event comparable to the Reformation. I am not endorsing him, but for him to be elected would most definatley take the wind out of all America's and even the West's critics. You would have given a massive middle finger to all the prats who I share my uni with that think Amricans are all in some way racists imperialists, and all the rest like them across the world.
It would be great.


That, but also a major boost in confidence for the african people, one of ' them' (yes as in black) becomming the president of the most powerfull country in the world. A black president could definatily be a positive force in world affairs. Just because he's black, sure. But screw that really.

[Proletariat]

PJ has a slight youth edge and also has those Popeye arms, if you've seen his frontroom pics. I'll take that action, Odin.

(Welcome back, too)

[Odin]

PJ has a slight youth edge and also has those Popeye arms, if you've seen his frontroom pics. I'll take that action, Odin.

(Welcome back, too)

Never count out the underdog, also as hard as it is for me to say Lemur more closely represents my point of view so my action is on him. That isnt to say that PJ is uncapable of handling himself, from time to time I find myself squinting at the screen and saying "well, yes thats a fair point" to his posts.

(Thanks)

[KukriKhan]

Topic is no longer about the candidate. Thread closed. Thanks to all contributors. :bow: