Nazi's and the Nobel - Page 12 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #**166** 10-19-2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

It is interesting how even "science" must bow down to the god of Political Correctness.

Gee, I wonder if PC ever influences "science" in other ways?

What, are you saying Watson may be onto something with his 'Africans aren't as smart' routine? Most of the good research indicates that all modern people migrated from Africa 50,000 years ago. So all the 'superior' races Watson apparently alludes to came from the same stock and not that long ago in evolutionary terms.

As for the Nobel committee honoring an apparent whack job, oh well, what do I know -- perhaps his science in the area he actually knows about is exemplary. If they had a clear history of choosing such people, I'd be a little more worried about it.

Arafat? Oh well, maybe they were trying to stimulate the thinking of the Palestinians, give them something to live up to. Who knows.

Gurkha · #**167** 10-19-2007, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

What, are you saying Watson may be onto something with his 'Africans aren't as smart' routine? Most of the good research indicates that all modern people migrated from Africa S50,000 years ago. So all the 'superior' races Watson apparently alludes to came from the same stock and not that long ago in evolutionary terms.

As for the Nobel committee honoring an apparent whack job, oh well, what do I know -- perhaps his science in the area he actually knows about is exemplary. If they had a clear history of choosing such people, I'd be a little more worried about it.

Arafat? Oh well, maybe they were trying to stimulate the thinking of the Palestinians, give them something to live up to. Who knows.

Cmac,

Good point, I was going to bring that up but you beat me to it. So in other words since we are all descended from the so-called Watson's inferior race, we are all doomed in a way.

http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3075661.ece

Dr Agin, a molecular biologist at the University of Chicago specialising in genetics, laid out a powerful case against Dr Watson in a blog entry at the online Huffington Post, arguing that intelligence is not a solid scientific concept to start with, and that the literature shows far greater differences in intelligence levels within groups than between groups.

As I have been repeatedly trying to say, there is no sceintific way to assess intelligence in any sense, don't know what new ground Watson is trying to break in his proclamation.

Here is another interesting read from the same link.

Similar condemnation followed from other parts of the US scientific establishment, where the incendiary issue of race and science is intimately bound up in the history of slavery and segregation. "We have enough problems in this country without Nobel laureate American scientists pontificating in error about fields of science outside their own expertise," said the editor of ScienceWeek, Dan Agin, "especially when the issues are vital to public policy and when what they say rips the American social fabric into pieces."

Someone out here though is relishing the very destruction of this said social fabric with utter perverse pleasure it seems.

peragro · #**168** 10-20-2007, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

King Arthur: Old woman.
Dennis: Man.
King Arthur: Man, sorry. What knight lives in that castle over there?
Dennis: I'm 37.
King Arthur: What?
Dennis: I'm 37. I'm not old.
King Arthur: Well I can't just call you "man".
Dennis: Well you could say "Dennis".
King Arthur: I didn't know you were called Dennis.
Dennis: Well you didn't bother to find out did you?
King Arthur: I did say sorry about the "old woman", but from behind you looked...
Dennis: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior.
King Arthur: Well I am king.
Dennis: Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society.
King Arthur: I am your king.
Woman: Well I didn't vote for you.
King Arthur: You don't vote for kings.
Woman: Well how'd you become king then?
[Angelic music plays... ]
King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king.
Dennis: [interrupting] Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Dennis: Oh, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.
Dennis: Oh but if I went 'round sayin' I was Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away.
Dennis: Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
King Arthur: Bloody peasant!
Dennis: Oh, what a giveaway! Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about! Did you see him repressing me? You saw him, Didn't you?

That was going through my mind when I was writing what I wrote.

Don't you find much of this thread ironic? I mean, what's the story behind a couple of nominal jews becoming nominal jews to begin with.

Say, how come no one's brought up affirmative action yet? It's the progressive racism.

aklim · #**169** 10-20-2007, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurkha

If you are not white, then its evident you would like to create more problems by adding fuel to the already huge fire thats burning, what else would be your agenda may I ask apart from that? Its not about your benefit, in fact your ulterior motive is to create a bigger ill feeling and like a pyromaniac, watch the fun and enjoy it.

Trust me, no self respecting blacks I know like affirmative action, its an insult on their abilities, a permanent put down to their entire life, but guess what, the world is not perfect and as I have seen in the past and now in present as well, it was needed at one stage, probably far less now.

How would we know that bias would make a person of other color prefer his own over a qualified black? Is there any guarantee that wouldn't happen? Has been known to happen, even to other races in different situation where a qualified person was superseded based on race, the world and its inhabitants is one ugly place, its not the fair utopia you are trying to peddle for some strange reason.

Even if a black person makes it via affirmative action, he or she would have to prove their mettle in the workplace of face stagnation or worse, termination of their services.

My credentials have been judged by authorities with far higher credentials than you would ever come across Mr. PC Wren

, your language skills are quite indicative of that, and is shown quite well in the way you write on this forum.

its your comprehension that needs a refresher course. The only reason you are bringing issue of grammar is not due to any substance but to pep up your now bruised ego, by your fictitious assessment about my grammar, not only you put balm to your bruise,

but you also manage to divert surreptitiously from the original topic, its not gonna work I am afraid.

I see. So, if I am white, it is my vanity that prevents me from supporting your point. If I am not white it is my desire to stoke the fire that prevents me from supporting your point. Hmmmm. Seems like the only way I can be not vain and not stoking the fire is to support your point, right? Sounds like a no win situation. What next? If I don't support your viewpoint, I am a Nazi? Maybe this weekend you'd like to go "Seig Heiling" with me and the Klan boys?

OK, I confess. I am a Chinaman who hates his race because I was bulled by other Chinese. I am secretly yearning to be a white man so I can lord it over the Chinese who bullied me when I was young. I long for the day where I can proudly don the white garb of the KKK and persecute minorities. Just like in "Silence of the Lambs", I am making myself a "White Man Suit" so I can transform myself someday.

Motive enough for opposing your viewpoint?

Then they could petition to end it, can't they? After all, if the very people it is supposed to benefit don't want it, what sort of support can it have? That is unless the self respecting group is outnumbered by the other group.

After the Japs lost WWII and their "holiday camps" came out to light, I'm sure there was plenty of prejudice against them. Add that to the junk they produced and well..... Refresh my memory again. Where are they today in the automotive world as well as other arenas?

That is irrelevant and you know it. In a sporting event, for instance, if one contestant has an unfair advantage at one point and is discovered, what happens to the result? Like I said, when evaluating whether they are competitive or not, any unfair advantage is going to muddy the water. Just like in a race, if you gain an unfair advantage at one point, are you going to say that your result is just as valid as anyone else in that race? It isn't. So what you are saying is that if our scores in an event are tied and I had an unfair advantage at one point, I can say that we are equals? I think not.

Looking at the run on paragraphs you have posted, I can't imagine that those who rendered judgment had a high opinion of it.

When judgment is passed on me, I tend to examine the source. If it is credible, I take stock. In this case, I won't lose any sleep over it.

Yes, you are so right. I see it all so clearly now. NOT! I don't suppose you think that it is irritating trying to read something that is one huge run on. I don't think anybody here is expecting every post to be perfect but it is about as irritating to me as people writing in all caps is to others. Can I follow it? Yes. Does it make it harder to follow? Yes. Please quit the mindfawking because I don't intend to pay for the sessions.

Bring it on.

Edit: Know what? Maybe you will get your way after all. Reason? Both sides want the ability to "dance in the fog". That way, nobody can see what they are doing. The white supremacists don't want it out in the open and investigated because it might settle some argument and leave them with less wind in their sails. You and your group don't want it out either because if Watson is proved right, same thing happens to you. Your argument of "all men are equal" loses steam. IOW both sides fear the investigation going against them. So, as long as it is ambiguous, one side can chant "All men are equal" and the other side can chant "White Power".

aklim · #**170** 10-20-2007, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Did I say that?

I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Both are equally offensive but one will get more attention that the other.

You said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Maybe it should get more attention.

So, if it is just as offensive whomever said it, why should one get more attention than the other.

aklim · #**171** 10-20-2007, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peragro

Say, how come no one's brought up affirmative action yet? It's the progressive racism.

Look a few posts back. I did. I did mention that with AA, achievement measurements are now murky.

peragro · #**172** 10-20-2007, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Look a few posts back. I did. I did mention that with AA, achievement measurements are now murky.

Oh, I musta missed it.

I find the AA more distasteful than Mr. Watson's comments and the like. At least with Mr. Watson you know where you stand and where he stands. With AA the racial attitude toward the perceived minority are hidden except when they come out in various "Uncle Tom", "he's stupid" or "he's just average" comments.

aklim · #**173** 10-20-2007, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peragro

I find the AA more distasteful than Mr. Watson's comments and the like. At least with Mr. Watson you know where you stand and where he stands.

With AA the racial attitude toward the perceived minority are hidden except when they come out in various "Uncle Tom", "he's stupid" or "he's just average" comments.

I know where he stood. However, before I can decide if it is distasteful or not, I would like to see how he attained the data that drove him to the conclusion.

Problem with AA is 2 fold. Both sides, they will never know for sure if the achievements of a minority is equivalent to that of the majority. A minority can never claim that their results indicate they are just as good and the majority can always claim that their results indicate that they are not as good. After all, in any game, handicap favors the weaker player. So, even those who earned their grade honestly will never be totally sure they beat out everyone else and those who were beaten out will never be sure that they were beaten out fairly.

peragro · #**174** 10-20-2007, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I know where he stood. However, before I can decide if it is distasteful or not, I would like to see how he attained the data that drove him to the conclusion.

It doesn't sound like he's too confident in his data since he's backed off what he said - or maybe he said he was misquoted. Either way I don't think he's pushing data to back the statement that was printed. So I doubt there's anything to look at.

Now, bell-curve dude wrote a whole book on it. I haven't ever read it but I assume there's data to look at and methodology as to how he came to his results.

aklim · #**175** 10-20-2007, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peragro

It doesn't sound like he's too confident in his data since he's backed off what he said - or maybe he said he was misquoted. Either way I don't think he's pushing data to back the statement that was printed. So I doubt there's anything to look at.

Now, bell-curve dude wrote a whole book on it. I haven't ever read it but I assume there's data to look at and methodology as to how he came to his results.

Hence, I wish someone would confront him about it. Show something he wrote or a recording of what he said. Let him explain it on his terms. If you don't like the way he gathered the data to arrive at the conclusion, speak then. Either he is lying or the reporters are lying.

I heard about it. Bought the book meaning to read it and see. Got to page 2 before I was bored and gave that book to Goodwill and took a tax deduction.

peragro · #**176** 10-20-2007, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Hence, I wish someone would confront him about it. Show something he wrote or a recording of what he said. Let him explain it on his terms. If you don't like the way he gathered the data to arrive at the conclusion, speak then. Either he is lying or the reporters are lying.

I heard about it. Bought the book meaning to read it and see. Got to page 2 before I was bored and gave that book to Goodwill and took a tax deduction.

As I said, I'm either ambivalent or uncaring about either of them; I can't decide. I'll bet there's quite a few stories on Watson just waiting for a google search...

Gurkha · #**177** 10-20-2007, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I see. So, if I am white, it is my vanity that prevents me from supporting your point. If I am not white it is my desire to stoke the fire that prevents me from supporting your point. Hmmmm. Seems like the only way I can be not vain and not stoking the fire is to support your point, right? Sounds like a no win situation. What next? If I don't support your viewpoint, I am a Nazi? Maybe this weekend you'd like to go "Seig Heiling" with me and the Klan boys?

OK, I confess. I am a Chinaman who hates his race because I was bulled by other Chinese. I am secretly yearning to be a white man so I can lord it over the Chinese who bullied me when I was young. I long for the day where I can proudly don the white garb of the KKK and persecute minorities. Just like in "Silence of the Lambs", I am making myself a "White Man Suit" so I can transform myself someday.

Motive enough for opposing your viewpoint?

Then they could petition to end it, can't they? After all, if the very people it is supposed to benefit don't want it, what sort of support can it have? That is unless the self respecting group is outnumbered by the other group.

After the Japs lost WWII and their "holiday camps" came out to light, I'm sure there was plenty of prejudice against them. Add that to the junk they produced and well..... Refresh my memory again. Where are they today in the automotive world as well as other arenas?

That is irrelevant and you know it. In a sporting event, for instance, if one contestant has an unfair advantage at one point and is discovered, what happens to the result? Like I said, when evaluating whether they are competitive or not, any unfair advantage is going to muddy the water. Just like in a race, if you gain an unfair advantage at one point, are you going to say that your result is just as valid as anyone else in that race? It isn't. So what you are saying is that if our scores in an event are tied and I had an unfair advantage at one point, I can say that we are equals? I think not.

Looking at the run on paragraphs you have posted, I can't imagine that those who rendered judgment had a high opinion of it.

When judgment is passed on me, I tend to examine the source. If it is credible, I take stock. In this case, I won't lose any sleep over it.

Yes, you are so right. I see it all so clearly now. NOT! I don't suppose you think that it is irritating trying to read something that is one huge run on. I don't think anybody here is expecting every post to be perfect but it is about as irritating to me as people writing in all caps is to others. Can I follow it? Yes. Does it make it harder to follow? Yes. Please quit the mindfawking because I don't intend to pay for the sessions.

Bring it on.

Edit: Know what? Maybe you will get your way after all. Reason? Both sides want the ability to "dance in the fog". That way, nobody can see what they are doing. The white supremacists don't want it out in the open and investigated because it might settle some argument and leave them with less wind in their sails. You and your group don't want it out either because if Watson is proved right, same thing happens to you. Your argument of "all men are equal" loses steam. IOW both sides fear the investigation going against them. So, as long as it is ambiguous, one side can chant "All men are equal" and the other side can chant "White Power".

Dude...........you are one confused guy, I pity for you, and the only Run ins you are having is because of a heavy meal of Moo Goo Gai Pan, take some Dysentrol, it will go away.

Last thing I need is assessment of competency in the English language judged by a alleged Chinaman who wants to be white

No wonder the comprehension problem, probably looking for Engrish instead of English I guess

Even if Watson is proved right, it would mean nothing as its not the absolute word in any sense but just a pseudo rationalization of a zany hypothesis to start with. If I am white, I have far less to loose in this study either way but if it goes for me, then it would mean that I am intellectually superior to a black man so KKK and David Duke will rejoice in every sense no matter how flawed the so called scientific explanation and as mentioned elsewhere, totally ruin the entire fabric of the society.

In your case you perceive it as a friend and foe situation just like your other posts about enemies and no mercy to them. You want this to become ugly and then declare the enemy to justify your ruthless punishment

By the way, can you guarantee equality in workplace? Are you able to assure persons who had suffered from blatant racism in the past due to the color of their skin that they will be given an equal share as long as they are qualified for it and won't be judged by their color. I don't see it coming from the likes of you. You seem to be beating your chest more than a hooded KKK rally participant to bring out Watson's results. Don't you see, even if proved wrong, benefit of doubt will be given to him. They will declare it was political pressure that made him retract his theory as people are already saying now. This would do permanent damage to the blacks in every sense and the whites would come back unscathed.

BTW: Don't like my commas.........too bad, suggest the IGNORE BUTTON for your convenience. Your mind is already fawked off beyond any plausible salvation. Nothing more can be done to it I am afraid. Maybe you should go join one of the remote torture chambers run by CIA in East Europe. It would be perfect environment for you. You can torture your perceived enemy and feel good about it.

#**178** 10-20-2007, 05:34 AM

Okay, I didn't read all 177 posts...

How does saying blacks are not as intelligent make him a Nazi? I didn't see a swastika tattooed on his arm.

t walgamuth · #**179** 10-20-2007, 06:24 AM

Now would anybody have argued if he had said "Blacks tend to be better atheletes?" (see, now, THIS one can be proved by the makeup of our professional sports teams).

How about "Whites tend to be better race car drivers". If you look at NASCAR you might think it it pretty clear, but then look at Louis Hamilton in F1 and you might get the idea that NASCAR might have a hiring problem.

How about "Whites tend to be better at Golf?....ooops, already disproved mightily."

Tennis? Decades ago.

Baseball? more decades ago.

Boxing? a century ago.

How about "Germans tend to be good with mechanical things"?

Tom W

Botnst · #**180** 10-20-2007, 06:28 AM

Exactly.

B