 |
|
gsmoove23
|
|
What I'm saying is there are quite alot of important studies being carried out in genetic trends, genetic influence on personality and so on, which I am in no way against. Tying genetic studies to superficial genetic difference like skin-tone is limiting and obscures wider trends.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
and what about people who are of the great yellow banana...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
Hey can read-heads be at the top this time, I'd really like to be a part of the master race this time instead of an accepted off-shoot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
Freckles, a sure sign of racial purity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
Whoa... hold on. I'm sensing that their is something about your racial make-up that deserves being rounded up and shot(hunt and pecks sentence with left hand).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tinyp3nis
|
 |
compensate this!!
May 2002
time: 07:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I am not positing that genes have anything to do with my exmples. I am positing the opposite, they have almost nothing to do with it. Over time, the superior genes should have shown themselves by making one race or the other dominent more often than another. Since that didn't happen, we are left to conclude that none of the "races" of humanity are superior to one another.
So far, what we have is, "well, there are visual variations among the 'races,' so there may or must be differences in other areas as well." The problem is, if those differences exist, why haven't they yet been detected? Disease resistance is the only unseen difference that scientists can show at this point. Changes only spread through a population when the lack of that mutation causes individuals to be less able to pass on their genes.
You have to explain why the environment in which white people evolved necessarily made us more intelligent than Africans. Why would people of average intelligence be unable to survive the Central Asian steppes? Certainly, it's a harsh environment, but no more so than many other parts of the world. What is special about that area that it required even greater intelligence to survive than say, the SouthWestern US?
Then, you need to explain why these supposedly superior peoples took so much longer to develop civilization (and couldn't hold onto it when they conquered it). |
What's all this? Just when I said the reasons cannot be singled out in your examples, you still try to.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
So it is settled, red-headed, left-handed freckled people will be the master race. Righties rights will be protected yet they will be required to wear right gloves as to be easily recognized so their rights may be protected.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
heterosexuality will be tolerated as well, just don't flaunt it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ramo
Actually, Arabs are Semites, not Indo-Europeans (turning language groups into "racial" categories is incredibly tenuous BTW). And some Indians, for instance Dravidians, aren't Indo-Europeans either. |
Semites are Caucasians. Yes, I'm aware that the Dravidians of southern India are different, but if you give the current government of India sufficient time this problem will eventually go away.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
For that matter religious people need to be rounded up, after all a link between religion and brain physiology has been proven and these dangerous ideas need to be stamped out. Perhaps sterilization would be the correct approach.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Dr. S., shhhhh! 
It's true, they are Caucausian, but they aren't white, at least by some people's definition. Hell, Arabs aren't even a phenotype group, but simply a people linked by language. This is part of my point about the mutable concept of race. By one definition, they are all members of the same race. By other definitions, they are all different races. How can we make determinations on the supposed abilities of one group or antoher when we can't even agree that the groups exist. |
No, Arabs are a phentoypic group if you are referring to the people who inhabit the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, Syria and Jordan. Iranians and Egyptians aren't Arabs. There are many people of African descent in those areas of the middle east as well.
It is currently speculated that humans first left Africa 80,000 years ago by crossing a shallow part of the Red Sea into what is now Yemen. Those people were the predecessors of both Caucasians and Orientals. The peole who currently inhabit Arabia are not their direct descendents though. It is thought that the Aborigines of Australia, and some minor ethnic groups along the coast of India and Malaysia are genetically closest to the group that left Africa. The people who currently inhabit Arabia are descended from people who went north, evolved into Caucasians, then moved back south and "replaced" the original inhabitants of Arabia. It is apparent that under the relentless pressure of tropical sunlight the evolution of dark complexion occurs fairly quickly.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Caligastia, the suggestion is offensive because at the core of the main philosphical trend of western civilization is that all people are equal. The converse theme, that some people are better than others has led to immense suffering on this planet. Once the idea that some people are inherently better than others creeps in, it is used to justify all sorts of horrors. I highly doubt the crafters of "seperate, but equal" fully comprehended the evil that would done when they legalized segregation, but it was a natural and obvious outgrowth of the idea that "the races" aren't equal. |
But even if you believe that races in general are not equal, you can still realise that people should be judged on an individual basis. When I am with people of different races, I don't make assumptions about them based on their race, I treat them as individuals. I don't look down on anyone because of their race. I consider all humans to be literally one big family.
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Even more offensive is that the idea is a lie. There is no proof whatsoever that "the races," whatever they are, are unequal. Every single "study" that shows Blacks to be the intellectual inferiors of whites has been decisively refuted. This can't be stated any more simply. You believe the racist lie because you want to believe it. To say otherwise is to say that there is a worldwide conspiracy of scientists that are trying to supress the truth. I just don't think so. |
Its simply not true that all scientists agree on this matter. In any case, who has the burden of proof? Those who say the races are equal, or those who say they are not? Why should equality be the default assumption when there is no more proof of equality than there is of inequality?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
No, Arabs are a phentoypic group if you are referring to the people who inhabit the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, Syria and Jordan. Iranians and Egyptians aren't Arabs. There are many people of African descent in those areas of the middle east as well. |
North Africans, except for the Berbers. Even the Maltese (sort of) are Arabs. Membership in the Arab nationality is defined by language, not phenotype, religion, or region of geographic origin. This is why the Arab League stretches from Morroco to Iraq. Egypt was the leader of pan-Arabism for decades. As nationality is an invented concept to begin with, it is up to each nation to decide how they define themselves.
Iranians don't even come in to the discussion. They were part of the Indo-European waves of barbarians that conquered the civilized world 4,000 to 1,500 years ago.
But your original point is correct, we are all Caucasians.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I didn't say all scientist disagree with you, just the vast majority of them. |
Do you have anything to back that statement up with?
quote:
Why does the burden of proof lie with you? Because you are the one that is asserting something which has been disproven repeatedly over the last century. |
How has "racial inequality" been "disproven"? To do that you would have to prove that all races are equal - something that has not been done.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2002 17:10
|