Obama the White Man

[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
Not a very good start if you want to claim facts and consensus is it

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

[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

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.

[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

[Banquo's Ghost]

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.

[Xiahou]

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.