CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Are Africans less intelligent than westerners ?
A very controversial subject which makes it worthy of debate .
I ask the question because this is the claim made by a Nobel prize winner and a pioneer in DNA research ; is his claim correct or not ?
One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.
James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London.
The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.
Hi Dermot, I would assert that we don't need the opinion of a Nobel Prize winner to point out that blacks are less intelligent than whites, and indeed other racial groups such as Asians.
The evidence of white's superior intelligence is glaringly obvious all around us in the shape of almost everything we use, and need in our everyday life.
The only people who would try present a counter argument would be blacks or the more obtuse members of the loony left P.C, brigade.
Even though we have all been conditioned to deny the blatantly obvious truth of not only the inferiority of the average black's intelligence, but also the lack of those in sufficient numbers with the necessary executive ability to form coherent administrations which can provide their people with effective education, health care, defense and other social considerations such as social housing and hardship relief.
From Galileo to Robert Oppenheimer, and from Logie Baird and Alexander Graham Bell to Charles Babbage and Tim Berners-lee we can observe the ingenuity and intelligence of the white man.
The discovery of penicillin,the splitting of the atom, the petrochemical industry, space going rockets and air travel all go to conclusively illustrate that blacks have contributed little or nothing to mankind's advancement and well being.
In times of national disasters such as crop failures it's to the west that the primitive, sad eyed Africans with their hard luck stories point their bottomless begging bowls.
For countless centuries they have been planting crops in barren sand with the predictable outcome of crop failure, predictable to everyone that is except the black man.
Take a look at Detroit and now Chicago, and note how the black man's lack of intelligence and non existent organising abilities has turned two previously prosperous and thriving cities into African style violent, poverty stricken hell holes.
Of course we'll have the usual squawking parrots responding with their boringly predictable chirping of , racist, racist, racist and their embarrassing ''whataboutery' blustering, but if by expressing these self evident truths makes me a racist, then I'm a racist and bloody well proud of it.
Hi Antrim , Excon has already expressed himself and as usual he just goes off on one ; I would much prefer if he addressed the points you make and attempt a rebuttal but I bet he won't .
I've heard Detroit was bad I didn't know Chicago was equally so , I must do a bit or research .
Hi Dermot, because there will be those who will try to deny the undeniable truth doesn't make it any less the truth.
As you sit at your computer powered by electricity communicating in English ( not Swahili ) and possibly listening to your radio be aware that such luxuries are available with the compliments of white inventors.
If, later on you settle down to watch a bit of television and maybe sip a beer from your fridge then make a telephone call to someone, be mindful that such 'taken for granted' technological miracles are all the result of the brilliance of the white man's superior intelligence and ingenuity.
After this, if you may to go for a burn up in your automobile with its pneumatic tyres safely gripping the tarmacadam highways and using your satnav to find your desired destinations be conscious that white scientists made such an experience possible.
We could go on indefinitely about how the modern world relies almost exclusively on the inventions and discoveries made as a direct consequence of the white man's superior intelligence but the neanderthal dummies will only try to dismiss the truth with the usual forlorn and meaningless cries of racist, racist.
The absolute truth that a circle isn't a square doesn't become any less true because some idiot(s) say I'm talking nonsense or others try to prove that a circle is indeed a square.
Hi Antrim , I read a piece recently from the New York Times regarding a book called Taboo which talks about blacks and their sporting abilities .......
When willing to speak openly, black and white athletes freely acknowledge what we intuitively suspect. "Blacks—physically in many cases—are made better," says Carl Lewis, one of the best sprinters of all time, shrugging as if to say, "Does anyone really question that?" This is the same Carl Lewis who, by his own estimation, worked out eight hours—per week, that is, not per day—in the run up to winning four gold medals at the 1984 Olympics. But such anecdotes alone cannot resolve this controversy. Lewis's belief that he is a breed apart can be seen as either an expression of black pride or a simplistic stereotype so powerful that even successful blacks have come to recite a racist party line.
Whiteness has come to symbolize political power, wealth, economic advancement, rationality, and civilized culture, whereas blackness is equated with the natural, sensuality, hyper-sexuality, musicality, laziness, intellectual deficiency, cultural pathology—and athleticism. With some variation, these stereotypes hold true throughout much of the world.
"People feel if you say blacks are better athletically, you're saying they're dumber," noted Frank Deford, the respected author and sports reporter. "But when Jack Nicklaus sinks a 30-foot putt, nobody thinks his IQ goes down." Even saying blacks and whites are merely different can echo of racism, as the Golden Bear learned. In 1994, Nicklaus was asked by a Canadian sports writer why there are so few blacks playing at the highest levels of golf. "They have different muscles that react in different ways," he said. It was an innocent enough statement, whether true or not, yet it provoked an immediate storm and inevitable back-pedaling. "God created all of us equally," said a chastened Nicklaus in response to charges that he was racist. "We are then influenced by our environment. That is all I have said." Thereafter, he refused to talk of the subject again.
Given all the controversy involved in addressing such a potentially divisive issue, it is worth asking why it even matters whether blacks are better athletes. It's a fair question and there isn't a short and simple answer. Taboo does its best to understand both the question and the skeptics. As a necessary consequence, the book is self-referential: it grapples with the issue of whether it should have been written at all, considering America's troubling racial history.
It makes interesting reading and of course the minute one mentions white superiority in anything the charge of racism is brought forward , undoubtedly advances in science , medicine and technology have been made mainly by whites how this fact encourages screeches of racism is beyond me .
We have the skill sets and intelligence for the environments we are born into and this is a fact and not racist too say so
Hi again Dermot. The book to which you make reference does sound interesting, but judged on your concise evaluation of its content I suspect the author had a hidden agenda.
Watson seems to highlight a number of already well known observations but appears to make few definitive conclusions.
Where such conclusions are expressed they appear to be cleverly camouflaged, predetermined rationalizations for the black's lack of achievement and development.
In my opinion the negro's athletic prowess in many sports reigns supreme, but I disagree with the author's misguided assumption that an acknowledgment of the black man's superior physical genetics automatically results in him being deemed as a dummy.
Why did he mention Jack Nicklaus and not Tiger Woods?
Why would Watson assume that I would consider Mo Farah to be dumb just because he is an outstanding athlete?
He isn't dumb and I never thought he was.
Why would the author assume that I, or anyone else would think that Usain Bolt is dumb.
He's not and I don't know anyone who assumes an athlete of any skin colour to be dumb due to their athletic ability.
That assumption is quite ridiculous and devalues the worthiness of the book's narrative.
I disagree with his assertion that our ''skill sets and intelligence must be confined to the environment into which we are born.
This assumption is wholly preposterous and belies the great civilizations of ancient Egypt as well the ancient and latter day civilization of China.
The world in which we live is dominated by, and dependent on, those elements which Watson points out are controlled and mastered by whites.
Winning athletic gold medals or football cups is virtually of no importance when compared with the success of a nations economy, such as that of Germany.
As a proud Irish man I recognize that there are many searching questions which we need to ask ourselves, including;-
Why did our forefathers not turn to the sea for food during the potato famine?
Why did we not see the dangers of being dependent on one type of crop for our survival?
Why are most of our best buildings, both structurally architecturally of English origin?
Where are our beautiful villages and hamlets which we see throughout the the U.K, and continental Europe?
Up to the middle of the last century many of our urban and rural dwellings were barely one step up from the proverbial African mud huts.
Hi Antrim , the author is quoting Frank Delford as stating that the assumption is blacks if athletic are somehow deemed dense , the author himself does not agree with the assessment .
Again my mistake I was asking the question are our skill sets and intelligence geared towards our societies ?
If we look at societies worldwide we see this in action as in an Amazonian is perfectly suited to his environment and can hunt , build and survive in conditions that would kill you or I ; he has knowledge of plants , wildlife , weather patterns and has skills learned and adapted for his environment.
I worked in The Aran Islands many years ago and watched natives build a currach which was a work of art and a vessel perfectly suited for the conditions they lived in , these people never went to college or studied boat building , house building or survival techniques for island life yet they had native intelligence and needed little else .
I'm a proud Irishman also and your questions are interesting , here is what I've read and learned over the years as I also thought about more or less the same questions
We didn't turn to sea because the mainly Catholic population had been stripped of their rights and were constantly teetering on the brink of starvation . They couldn't vote , own land , have a trade etc ,etc
When the potato failed fishermen all over Ireland pawned or sold their gear to buy meal , the average Irishman did not know how to fish or cultivate anything except the potato .
A lot of our best buildings are indeed of English origin but some of our best and most beautiful were built by Irish built an example being Donegal castle built by the O 'Donnell clan in 1474 ; these building skills were learned from the Anglo - Normans
I've stayed in some beautiful Irish villages as in Kinsale , Cong , Ballyvaughan etc , etc we don't have as many as other countries as we are a lot smaller a country .
Some of the rural dwellings were indeed dreadful but some as in traditional thatch cottages were a thing of beauty .
Thanks for the input it's been a good conversation
I dunno what else there is to say.. I feel SOILED when I dive into this cesspool. But, I'll address his post..
It's simply HATRED with statistics.. And, you know what they say about statistics..
It IS true that Detroit is a decimated city.. IF you WANTED to, you COULD say it's because lots of black people live there.. Or, you COULD say it's because the automotive industry left town.. I know what I'd say..
Of course you hate me.. Cause I'm the one who called you out on your RACISM, and you don't like it.. I dunno WHY.. If somebody called me out on my HATRED for Nazis, I'd say, you betcha I HATE Nazis.. So, why don't you step up and EMBRACE your hatred of black people?? Be PROUD of it..
But, you HATE black people, and are ashamed of it at the same time... That's fucked up, right??
I would have been extremely disappointed if I hadn't been able to lure you to respond with your usual ''in denial'' nonsense.
Good to see that you were the first idiot to take the bait, but, undoubtedly there'll be a few more like you.
However, regardless of how many emotionally charged irrational outbursts, such as yours, are posted the truth of my statement is unquestionably scientifically accurate.
I BELIEVE that you BELIEVE your fake statistics.. I'm just wondering which came first.. HATE - or the statistics to back it up..
Seriously, cause in my every day life, I don't run into statistics like that... Oh, if I LOOKED for them, I'd certainly KNOW where to find them.. But, I DON'T look..
You look. I wonder WHY..
So far, we've been discussing black people, so I dunno how you feel about Hispanics.. But, if you wanted to read a "scientific" study about how inferior Mexicans are to white people, you can find it on the Heritage Foundation website.. Not surprisingly, their "study" says those Mexicans are really STUPID, and have a BAD gene pool to boot.
Now, I don't visit that site, but my bet is that we could find a similar "scientific" study on black people... So, for ME.. I would NEVER visit a site like that unless I was LOOKING for agreement.. My question for you is, do you present the "scientific" stuff because it FITS your mentality, or because it's SCIENCE??
I'm just trying to find out whether you HATE black people, or are just reporting scientific data to us.
Stupid fuck. If you're not ready to debate, don't spew your hate shit opinions and not expect a counter. Do you even have the intelligence to dissect a counter? i believe not .....no wonder you try laying down measures(Some lame jabs) to ensure you are not replied.
The mistake that's being made is implying that because statistically black people are less intelligent, it's because of genetics.
That's simply not true. Any educated person can easily point out the vast amount of factors affecting the lower intelligence of black people.
Culture is the glaringly obvious one. Asians tend to be smarter than black and white people because they have a culture built around the expectation of educational success. There's a huge amount of pressure placed on Asian children by their families to try their hardest and achieve academically, and as a result, they have more support from their parents in terms of physical aid and economic aid.
The material deprivation of black people is undeniably also a huge factor. Black children can't reach their full potential if they're living in poverty, as many black families are. Minerals, vitamins, books, computers, learning resources/tools, etc. are all extremely important to education success and they can't be obtained without money.
Now, that's all about black westerners. But Africans? Well, the answer is even easier.
Africa is the poorest continent on Earth. Along with a dire lack of infrastructure, it's infested with draught, hunger, general poverty, war and violence... the reasons as to why Africa is like this is a topic for another day.
Undeniably, though, these conditions are not suitable for education. So, why are westerners more intelligent than Africans? Because the west is rich. Africa is not. If genetics are involved, it's due to conditions, not because of "the black gene".
For starters we would have to look at a few factors, and I'm going to try to be fairly broad understanding that it may be seen as racist by some.
First I would like to know what "testing" was done and how. What was the control group, who was tested, what was the background of those whose answers pointed to the claim that there was no equality in cleverness.
Second.....seriously Detroit is awful. I stayed once for a week and my car was nearly swallowed up by the many many many potholes, no joke you could tell exactly where the city line was by how the roads are. That city in particular has been brought down by crooked politician after crooked politician. It was prosperous once but when the car manufacturing stopped so did the jobs. The government doesn't have the money to pay the cops needed to work such a large city, and crime is rampant. People aren't given a direction to go, they simply exist. Some are trying to make it better with the sum total of zero support they are getting from their government officials. It's a work in progress, honestly it's interesting to see how society would be if there was a complete government collapse. The criminals are taking it over as the good people who can leave, do. And those who can't are left behind and trying to survive. This doesn't mean they are less intelligent, just that they don't have the means or opportunity to do so. Some are trying to make the most of it but they don't have the help that many in other communities have. Some have the benefits of having teachers who care, good and proper nutrition and good families where family value is encouraged, others don't have that. Breaking through the mold of what is expected of you is incredibly difficult, especially when everyone around you works to keep you in your group.
One of the dumbest things I've heard was a black child studying for his class and he was mocked and accused of acting white. Acting white? Trying to get an education to better yourself and your situation is imperative, but that's how some of them think. I still don't think that makes them less intelligent, simply lacking the the motivation to not accept the lot they have in life.
Some major players in the scientific community are black. The head of NASA, Charles Bolden. Neil deGrasse Tyson, Sylvester Gates are both highly respected scientists, Mary Jackson is an aerospace engineer.....there are lists and lists of great accomplishments by members of the African community. The main differences are they are given the opportunity to advance and succeed and they had the drive to do it.
Above is, I think, the study that you are referring to or at least the mention of it. The main points brought up in IQ scores done around the world are that:
The racial groups studied in the United States and Europe are not necessarily representative samples for populations in other parts of the world. Cultural differences may also factor in IQ test performance and outcomes. Therefore, results in the United States and Europe do not necessarily correlate to results in other populations
Nonetheless there is a general consensus that the average IQ in developing countries is lower than in developed countries, but subsequent research has favored environmental explanations for this fact, such as lack of basic infrastructure related to health and education.
Nonetheless there is a general consensus that the average IQ in developing countries is lower than in developed countries, but subsequent research has favored environmental explanations for this fact, such as lack of basic infrastructure related to health and education.
One can find great intelligence when given the opportunity and finding the motivation to.
*note: sorry if this response is choppy, finding links and trying to compose a proper debate response while at work isn't easy today. ;D
This is definitely not a political question. This is purely a statistical question, nothing less, nothing more - it just comes down to what the stats show. If mean intelligence is lower in Africans than it is in Westerners, then the claim that Africans tend to be less intelligent than Westerners is true, end of story. I don't know what the stats show, so I won't make any claims here.
Note however, my emphasis on the word "tend." I emphasize this because if there are differences in mean intelligence, they wouldn't mean that one should assume an African individual will be less intelligent that a Westerner (or vice-versa), it just means that it is more likely than not that the Westerner will be more intelligent. One shouldn't make assumptions about individuals because any difference in mean intelligence will likely be small enough that no level of certainty can be involved in those assumptions.
To simply say that Africans are less intelligent that Westerners is vague, and will lead people to make the wrong conclusions.
There are certainly many Africans more intelligent than you and I are.
(Note: Intelligence is not defined clearly, adding a layer of vagueness to the question)
Also of all the majority of whites at the UN(probability), Kofi Annan an african was elected as the general secretary.
There are africans who worked and some still working at NASA who are more intelligent, knowledgeable and reputable than the scientist who is trying to use his influence to promote racism as he is a racist himself and a supremacist ofcourse.
Emotional is a racist. Hate hate hate. Satisfaction of feeling (delusion) better than another...............................................................................................................
Leftist are Racist don't you get the facts as presented ? Okay i must show you again ?
Former President Bill Clinton tried to get former senator Ted Kennedy to endorse Hillary Clinton for president in the 2008 election by describing Barack Obama this way: "A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags."
That's the way Democrats viewed Negros but i think it was a Republican that freed the slaves ! Democrat slave owners opposed it but i'm sure you don't know history !!!!!!!!!
Let me tell you about Democrats and their thought on Negros and i quote LBJ !
As a matter of fact, it was Democrat President Lyndon Baines Johnson who stated, “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years” as he confided with two like-minded governors on Air Force One regarding his underlying intentions for the “Great Society” programs.
Bill Clinton helped sink his wife's chances for an endorsement from Ted Kennedy by belittling Barack Obama as nothing but a race-based candidate.
"A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee," the former president told the liberal lion from Massachusetts, according to the gossipy new campaign book, "Game Change."
The book says Kennedy was deeply offended and recounted the conversation to friends with fury.
After Kennedy sided with Obama, Clinton reportedly griped, "the only reason you are endorsing him is because he's black. Let's just be clear."
Democrats are Racist but you cannot accept the facts of their Racist History !!!!!!!!!!!!!
As a matter of fact, it was Democrat President Lyndon Baines Johnson who stated, “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years” as he confided with two like-minded governors on Air Force One regarding his underlying intentions for the “Great Society” programs.
Now back to the topic no way can you dispute the way the American Left looks at Africans and have since the 1960's. Facts are proof and you trying to dispute the history of Democrats which is the American Left shows you are null and void !
I can be against people (of a group ) by names and their actions(individuals). Not the entire group , of members who haven't even ever exhibited the act of racism as in line with group's malevolence.
What i am doing is trying best to avoid hating. Especially some people i don't know.
Hatred is a killer disease.
I will attack if i am attacked first and that ends there...
i don't go witch hunting racists....
But since i came to CD it's been easier spoting a lot of em'
Take a look at Detroit and now Chicago, and note how the black man's lack of intelligence and non existent organizing abilities has turned two previously prosperous and thriving cities into African style violent, poverty stricken hell holes.
Nothing more to be said about Negros and i quote Antrim.
According to non racist research, high temperatures lead to low productivity from workers. Makes workers timid as compared to places where there are cold weathers compelling workers to be active with the intention of producing heat rather with a positive outcome of high economic productivity.....
So now tell me how whites are intelligent than blacks due to some non progressing black dominated cities while there are also non progressing cities of white dominated.
Also again like texas, there are cities with black mayors , white dominated that are doing well economically and the opposite applies in the highlighted factors.....
And you can have the opposite of the entire passage there where in chicago which is black dominated yet with a white mayor, they are performing abysmally economically....same applies to detroit where they have a white mayor....
now do you blame the mayors' intelligence or the citizens?
Are the opposite factors applying with abysmal results as well
...............................
New york has a white mayor and you give credit to him for economic progress but detroit and chicago have white mayors aswell and you want to blame the failures of the city on the people because they are blacks and your history books say it is symbolic of blacks??
Is that a statistics for higher intelligence in one race than the other or just racism from your buddy Antrim?
If you're disputing what I said then I'm afraid you didn't read it, as I said "There are certainly many Africans more intelligent than you and I are," in agreement with you.
"I am attacking the fact that you are considering the possibility of the existence such a data and it's genuinity."
I will consider any possibility, because I am open minded and honest, and try to be as unbiased as possible. The fact that you refuse to consider such things proves you to be close minded and/or dishonest.
"If i told you your mum needs to be killed(imagine the most atrocious reason for), would you consider it?"
Yes (immediately).
"If i told you the president of North Korea needs to be killed, would you consider it? (how quickly)"
"See who's calling me dishonest.....or perhaps your mum is already dead, you are a runaway mum hater boy, or you never even met her."
That sentence makes no sense, and it is incorrect.
"Do you know statistics i have about the opposite(Blacks intelligent than whites) i have always ignored?"
Now your really making no sense. I was considering the possibility of data showing whites to be smarter than blacks (which I've seen), and now you ask about the opposite, I'm confused. Besides it doesn't matter whether the stats actually exist, because I was talking about open mindedness being willingness to consider the possibility of any of ones beliefs being wrong.
"Should that be counted as unopen mindedness or "for the greater good?"
First, our testing for intelligence is not a hard science. Second, if it were the case that Africans are less intelligent, it does not carry a genetic implication as some might think. The average of anything does not tell you about the specific. Furthermore, when Polish Jews arrived in the US they had lower average IQs. After a couple generations they had higher average IQs.
The impact of environment over time is not fully understood. Do you suppose the natives of Papua New Guinea would have high IQ test scores? Not likely. But the their primitive lifestyle is not the result of low IQ, but rather the opposite.
Genes and intelligence are both too dynamic for there to be a direct or singular causal relationship. Not to mention that our measurements of intelligence are somewhat subjective. For an anecdotal example, we can all think of someone who is "booksmart" but lacking in "common sense". This just means they are intelligent in a certain respect, but less so in another. Testing is beginning to account for variety in intelligence, but I expect there is a long way to go.
Why did African nations never colonise or dominate our societies ?
I'm sure they did. They dominated each other. Just as Europeans spent hundreds/thousands of years dominating each other. Africa is a huge continent, with a long history that we don't have cause to learn about. As for why they didn't expand beyond the continent; I expect it's a mix of institutions, culture, and geography.
Were white nations more technologically advanced ?
Not in the Dark ages when much of Northern Africa was dominated by Muslims who were at the height of their golden age. Western civilization's dominance is relatively recent and is likely due to a complex combination of factors. Though I expect our institutions that came out of enlightenment era philosophies are the largest factor.
Yes , intelligence testing has a long way to go ; the tests proposed in the article I posted are still in their infancy .
Intelligence in a certain respect is a good term ; white explorers in the Amazon used to have a terrible time finding game to kill for sustenance yet the native Amazonians had no such problems .
Apart from genetics our intelligence seems to be suited towards our environments .
I read a piece by Jared Diamond earlier today and his claim as to why we dominated regards colonisation is because Europe was surrounded by sea , and was blessed with a pretty good climate for growing produce as in olives for oil and other commodities for export which meant shipbuilding was vital for countries to take part in trade . Africa was constantly hit by droughts , famines and disease which put them at a huge disadvantage .
It seems western nations dominance is going to change in the next 50 years with experts predicting world dominance by the Chinese and Indians
I won't discount the importance of geography, but Africa is huge and much of it is resource rich and not subject to geographic disaster.
Two excellent books on the subject with differing approaches are "Guns Germs, and Steele" and "Why Nations Fail". I put more stock in the explaining power of "Why Nations Fail" which puts more emphasis on institutions. If there will be a decline of the west and a rise of the east, it will be because they are adopting beneficial institutions while we are abandoning them, as suggested in "Civilization: The West and the Rest", another good read.
Yeah.. It CAN'T be racism if it's true, right?? The reverse, of course, is, that if it's NOT true, it's racist as hell. Can there be TWO truths?? No. If there can't BE two of 'em, they're really NOT truths, are they? They're beliefs. And that puts us back to square one. You have your beliefs and I have mine..
Now, you can assert that your belief is the truth, and you do. Antrim certainly does, and he's got statistics to back him up. But, his truth is no more the truth than mine is.. After all, black people MIGHT be dumb as rocks. I just don't BELIEVE they are..
No it's not racism to state a fact if indeed it is a fact ; and if it's not true it's not racist either , it just means there is no evidence to back the claim up .
If one of these positions is correct well then it's a truth and not a belief .
I did not ' assert ' any position on this topic but typically you go into a hissy fit , whys that ?
I did not say black people are dumb as rocks , I asked people to debate the topic and whether they believe the veracity of the Nobel prize winners statement ; this is a debate site do you realise that ?
Look.. I'm trying to debate the issue.. But, it's devolving into a I didn't say that - YES you did debate, and I'm not gonna argue about what I SAID...
Ok.. Let's STOP with the hedging.. DO you assert that black people are LESS intelligent than Westerners?? IF you assert it, IS it the TRUTH??
If I may be permitted to cut to the chase, lemme SUGGEST that your answer is, YES I do assert it, and YES, it's the truth.. Or, maybe you'd wanna hedge some more.. I dunno.
Well, I'm NOT a hedger. To that, I would assert that I DON'T believe black people are dumb as rocks, and THAT is MY truth.
So, there we are, back at square one with ONE truth, and ONE misapprehension - each of us knowing what side they're on.. Now, I'd be happy to learn my cutting to the chase is wrong and that there IS room for debate.. Wouldn't that be nice?
Lastly, lemme correct one of your assumptions.. I'm NOT a hissy fitter..
I asserted nothing , do you know the meaning of the word ?
If I asserted it and it was proved to be true it would be true , if I asserted it and it proved to be false it would indeed be false ; you seem to have difficulty with this concept , whys that ?
No you may not assert my answer is yes and that's not ' hedging ' either .
I never said blacks are dumb as rocks did I ?
Why do you keep telling me what you think I want to say instead of letting me state what I think ?
When you have the courtesy of listening instead of telling me what you think I think , I may answer .
You don't do hissy fits ? So you type certain word in bold capitals and tell people what to say a pretty good example of a temper tantrum or hissy fit
One has to wonder if everything as you view it is racist. Is there a bottom to your racist claims would be the question. There is a lot of black inanimate objects in this world what would be your next target ? Excon you are so blinded by rage that you don't have the ability to understand when someone is yanking your chain. Darwin is doing it , Antrim does it and yes Outlaw does it. Shock factor brings out your emotions and you are gut hooked immediately !
The problem excon has got is there is such a thing as satire but the 74 year old spun out Leftist from Seattle just does not get it. No one is denying there is not racism in the world to do so would be avoiding reality but for it to be all consuming for one individual shows he imagines it everywhere.
Yank away... But, if you're gonna post racist shit, I'm gonna BE on it like white on rice.
If you do it to BAIT me, I'm gonna BE in your shit.. If you do it because you HATE black people, I'm gonna BE in your shit.. In other words, I don't care WHY you're a racist.. I just care that you are..
SUPER STUPID everything is racist to you ! You are consumed with it and you can bet i will bait you just to touch your emotions you wear on shoulder. At your age which is what you claim to be 74 you are a petulant little 74 year old child !