Parting Shot

Posted by $ SpiritWoman 1 week, 3 days ago to Science
63 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

((The following is an uncomfortable fact to face, but it MUST be done, we MUST understand so solutions can be put in place to avoid the ultimate holocaust.))



Before I leave the Gulch, I must tell you the important issue that the world, its leaders and people need to resolve; the MOST important problem, in fact, facing the world today. And that is, the technology that can annihilate the entire planet, exists simultaneously with a race of people that have yet to develop (or evolve) the extended sense of foresight that anatomically modern humans long ago, evolved with the help of Neanderthal (and Denisovan) DNA, and which is wanting in the races of those derived from Sub-Saharan Africans.

First, as I’ve been saying for a while now, black Americans, and black Britons for that matter, cannot be placed in positions of power and authority, and the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, and perhaps other regions, MUST have caretaker forms of government until and unless they can show they are capable of self-restraint and self-governance.

The following two comments are reposted from RT:

1. My understanding of the traits and character of those who descend from black Sub-Saharan Africans, both Old World and New World, changed dramatically following certain attempts by Obamma, who because I refused to do his bidding or to work with him---I had assessed his character and found it wanting---told repeated lies about me to others, blacks and whites. Which wouldn't bother me particularly, but the blacks believed him. They believed his lies about me, and they believed that I had lied. And that wouldn't have bothered me either, EXCEPT they still thought I should drop everything else in my entire life and do things SOLELY for the black race, and that they had the right to force me to do so.

I understood then that the world was dealing with a race of people still wearing the clothes---attitudes, motivations, thinking abilities, of children, and sometimes very young children. And I found proof, external proof, of that in the writings of Jean Piaget, and in the history---the true, real, and factual history---of blacks in America.


2. (This was a reply to a poster asking me if I was racist): Before I tell you, let me be EXCRUCIATINGLY clear. (Excruciating for you and others of your ilk). When an entire race of people treat me the way this race of people have in the past 15 years, starting with the selection of Obamma, and I become angry, even furious, at that treatment, and THEN they have the stupidity and immaturity to call me racist, thinking I will be shamed and feel guilty, I am disposed to inform the world of the inability of this race of people to share in the development of the future of the world, to the same extent as other peoples can.

Is that clear enough for you?



The people that remained in Africa, that developed from Bantu and Nilo-Saharan genes, have a very strong ability for pattern recognition, which was the better survival technique for the environment, instead of the extended sense of foresight that enabled the development of the slower acting analytical reasoning that those with the small amount of Neanderthal or Denisovan genes were able to generate. I know this is true, for at least one reason: I took the online Ghanaian IQ test, which was based solely on pattern recognition, and recognition of changes in patterns. It was quite difficult at the end. I think this is why so many American blacks do well as American football running backs!! We need to develop and exploit this talent. This is not to say other peoples can’t make great running backs, but African Americans seem to excel.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
    Various far-apart bloodlines obviously have evolved genetic differences which cause them to have different characteristics. Some of these characteristics include those of the brain. It may not be wrong to conclude that certain related populations may exists that have such a low intelligence level that they may find it difficult to handle complexity of life in advanced societies. I don't think that's racist, it seems to be the reality. However, I believe the accepted scientific view on this is that both, genetics and environment, play a role in person's characteristics. So, maybe not all is lost. Maybe the problem can be resolved with additional education and training.

    I believe the problem is not with racial characteristics. The problem is with the idea of government. There shouldn't be any. There is your problem. Government is slavery. If you put less intelligent people in positions of authority, they have less capacity to trick you into thinking you are free (while they are enslaving you). You use your superior intellect to see through their lies. However, when you put more intelligent people in positions of authority, they have more success, so, you don't even notice you are their slave.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
      I doubt that you truly understand how evolution, in natural selection, actually works.

      Simply put, and this is where the Left, in particular the Leftist Jews, turn the concept of evolution inside out, simply put, evolution is a term we use to describe a physiological or biological response to an environmental stimulus. How that happens, that is, we know mutations must be random, but the selection of a particular mutation, is not random. The selection of a dominant trait or attribute IS the response to the environment.

      The rest of your comment made very little sense.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
        "The rest of your comment made very little sense."

        You think that black people are not capable of handling power, right?

        My argument is that NOBODY is capable of handling "power", nor should they have any. The only reason why you don't see self-restraint/etc in black people is because they are not intelligent enough to trick you into it. Others are. You are just tricked.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
          If you want to respond to one of my topics, argumentatively, please stick to the relevant points of the topic.

          My topic concerned the inadvisability of those who descend from black Sub-Saharan Africans, both New World and Old World, in positions of power or authority, because of less ability for self-restraint and self-control and government, itself. I used findings from several disciplines, including psychology and evolutionary science, and also my own experiences. I stated that this holds for those countries in Sub-Sahara Africa and possibly other regions of the world as well.

          I did NOT state anything about any other people or culture, insofar as self-restraint and self-control are concerned.

          Your 'argument', as many arguments of black Americans do, attempted to include a 'universe', a generalization to all peoples. In the same way, I have black folk tell me something like, "But white folks do this too". That is not relevant.

          In fact, when a child is caught doing something wrong, and he says, "Well, Billy (or so-and-so) does it", a wise mother would chastise him for believing that it absolves him of any wrong doing.

          This is a very frustrating trait of these people.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
            Well, you did differentiate between two groups:

            "a race of people that have yet to develop (or evolve) the extended sense of foresight that anatomically modern humans long ago, evolved"

            As I understand it, you are implying that "anatomically modern humans" do have the "self-restraint and self-control" that is required for someone in positions of power. I mean, it is pretty clear to me from what you are saying.

            My argument is that nobody has. It is the "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" argument. It is not even my own invention. Also, the second part of my argument is that you just think "anatomically modern humans" have the required level of "self-restraint and self-control" because they have convinced you (manipulatively) that they do when in reality they probably don't. The way they may do this may be, for example, by them creating a pretext and using it as an excuse for why they didn't restrain themselves that one time. This requires intelligence. My thesis would be that, assuming black people have on average lower level of intelligence (which I believe is true), they wouldn't be capable of creating a convincing enough pretext for it to work on groups more intelligent then themselves. So, my argument is that you are not seeing that "anatomically modern humans" also abuse power because they do it in a way that leaves you asking for more. I'm not saying that because "anatomically modern humans" do it, it is ok for black people to do it. I am saying NOBODY should be allowed to do it.

            I will admit to something shameless, I tried to pivot the discussion from your topic to my target topic, which is abolition of government.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
              You do not know what an 'anatomically modern human being' is.

              The rest of your comment I assume is gibberish.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
                I wish I could respond somehow, but it is rather difficult to respond to 'it's gibberish' argument. Maybe you can tell me which particular statement is not making sense and why.

                It is true, I don't know exactly what you mean by 'anatomically modern human being'. Based on your post however, it seems to be one that possesses 'extended sense of foresight'. Still, it doesn't matter for the purpose of how I was using the term.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
        "evolution is a term we use to describe a physiological or biological response to an environmental stimulus"

        That's not how I use the term. Evolution (via natural selection) is when certain genetic information mutations, recombinations and whatever else we may not know about still, happen to cause the individuals possessing them to reproduce (them) more successfully than others in the population, probably due to some environmental factors (which usually differ in different geographical areas). It has nothing to do with any 'response' to 'stimulus'. I guess there are epigenetic changes which may do what you say but that is not evolution via natural selection.

        "The selection of a dominant trait or attribute IS the response to the environment."

        Yes, but not on an individual level. This is happening on a long time scale and the effect is on the entire gene pool.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
          The upshot is I will not respond to any of your comments.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
            I don't think that's a valid argument.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
              I was not arguing. Are you unable to see that?

              And by the way, my original topic: "Parting Shot" was not meant to evoke argument. It was posted to instruct the world, its leaders, and its peoples, of consequences in the future caused by actions in the present.

              I can understand your need to counter my statements, even though those arguments, so-called, are childish and immature. For two reasons: Your desire that blacks obtain power and dominance (over other peoples) is paramount, and two, Piaget has already stated and observed what I have observed.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 2 days ago
                I saw an opportunity to proselytize the ideas of free market capitalism / anarcho-capitalism. I took it.

                "Your desire that blacks obtain power and dominance"

                That's actually the opposite of what I want. I was trying to say that NOBODY should be obtaining power and dominance over others.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
          Again, you make very little sense. Your confusion is difficult to counter.

          Your reasoning capabilities seem stunted.

          In fact, you seem to be using what Piaget observed in young children, and stated in his book from 1923 "The Language and Thought of The Child". I have posted comments and topics on Piaget. At any rate, he calls this type of thinking: interpretational mania, or imaginary reasoning. I suggest you download his book online, and read it.

          The journalist responsible for the essay "Project 1619" uses this same type of reasoning.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
            This looks like an ad hominem argument fallacy to me.

            Let's see, is my reasoning child like...? Shit, if it was, how would I know it, right? This sounds like an argument from ignorance fallacy.

            Talk about stunted reasoning...

            Well, alright, let me try to understand your argument here. But.. why read a book when you have chatgpt, assuming it is not going to make stuff up on me this time.

            'Piaget observed that children, especially in the preoperational stage (roughly ages 2-7), often display this kind of thinking. They may attribute life or intentions to inanimate objects (animism), create fantastical explanations for real-world events, or engage in magical thinking. For example, a child might believe that the sun "goes to bed" at night or that the trees are sad when it rains.'

            Okey... I have no idea how this is relevant... There is nothing in my comment that appears to use this type of reasoning. I simply stated well established scientific principles and corrected you on the widely accepted meaning of the world 'evolution'.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Dobrien 1 week, 3 days ago
              If you base your arguement and think it is correct because it’s “well established scientific principals” than you must believe in climate change. Strange your handle or name is nonconformist. non·con·form·ist
              /ˌnänkənˈfôrməst/
              noun
              1.
              a person whose behavior or views do not conform to prevailing ideas or practices.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 3 days ago
                It would not be terribly smart to refuse to agree with provably true facts. "nonconformist" is a reference to not conforming to statism, which by the way is not only provably immoral but also just a mass delusion.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Dobrien 1 week, 2 days ago
                  Provably true facts lmao. In the msm news it’s widely accepted that we are a 50/50 country. Reality says that’s bullshit. In the medical community it was widely accepted the Jab was good for you. Only those that took it regret it not the non-vaxed. Lemmings widely accepted running off the cliff was good because all the others were doing it.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
                Thanks, Mr. Dobrien. I could use a little help once in a while. I sometimes forget that other people are not as 'attuned' shall we say, in the methods of logic and experimental science as myself.

                But it is also true that these same people should do their homework instead of assuming they know everything and have been taught truth and facts.

                Just in case I have confused people, by experimental science I mean the type of experiments undertaken by Michael Faraday and other western natural philosophers.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
                I couldn't find your comment on pattern recognition; I think it was you. But I want to elaborate on how NFL running backs are able to find those 'holes' their offensive line opens up for them, and run right through to the goal posts.

                I believe they can see not just the pattern before them, but how that pattern is going to change in the very next minute. And they can do this instantaneously. As I said, I took the Ghanaian IQ test a few years back, and it was completely based on pattern recognition, and changes in those patterns.

                I wonder if blacks then use this sense of pattern recognition in most of their thinking; if the 'pattern' or what they perceive as a pattern, even as an abstract analogy to a concrete pattern---more study needs to be done on this---seems to be different, they might react in ways that seem foreign to other people.

                This reaction to a change in pattern would be the most valuable asset if one were to survive in a jungle environment, and would preclude the development of a slower, analytical type of thinking, where an observer would need to 'analyze' the situation confronting him, taking it apart in order to see the best way to deal with a change.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
              You do not understand what an ad hominem fallacy is.

              Unless you read the book I recommended: "The Thought and Language of the Child", by Jean Piaget, published 1923, you are not qualified to assume anything about my comments.

              I have also made certain posts regarding Piaget's observations. You have not even bothered to read those. I do not have time to 'converse' with you.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by nonconformist 1 week, 2 days ago
                "You do not understand what an ad hominem fallacy is."

                It is attacking a person's character and appeal to emotion. You are saying I'm childish, my reasoning capabilities are stunted... without showing exactly how that is true. Even if that was the case, it doesn't matter. My stunted reasoning abilities must be preventing me from seeing how this is not a personal attack but a rebuttal of my arguments themselves.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 1 week ago
    This is a tough subject that still needs to be discussed and aired out to clear it up. It is hard to not group people and paint them with a broad brush, especially in these times of identity politics scorching the land, but Ayn Rand hated racism (and other group-isms) and pointed the way to alleviate its effects. That is Objectivism addresses individuality over group including racial groups, in spite of the fact groups exist.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 1 week ago
      Another thought just occurred to me. When, exactly when, did this 'subject' and the whole idea and concept of 'racism' as a shameful and even criminal 'thought'---not action, just thought---become sensitive? What is the timeline here? Knowing the timeline, we should be able to understand who and what motive has impelled and imposed this abhorrent anti-reality and anti-human nature absurdity on America.

      I have some ideas. Well, actually I know the answers. The determination now is becoming centered around the precise names of those responsible for the insanity.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 6 days, 6 hours ago
        "Another thought just occurred to me. When, exactly when, did this 'subject' and the whole idea and concept of 'racism' as a shameful and even criminal 'thought'---not action, just thought---become sensitive?" Good question and suspect it goes back to antiquity. However, IMHO, in our country it seems to begin its current manifestation in the roots of the abolitionist movement in the late 18th century although it was a counter point to race based slavery.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 6 days ago
          I'm sure a great deal of its notoriety comes from the time when eugenics became a fashionable discipline among people like Margaret Sanger, et al., and when the quest for a national identity seemed worn out by the First World War. Hitler, humiliated by the 'Peace' Treaty, reparations, and the "Black Horror on the Rhine', picked up on it as a means of returning to a more glorious past, and actually returned to a more inglorious babarism. But that's a different story.

          The Jewish intellectuals, of course, following World War II, and their need for Zionism and the quest for a Jewish homeland, used it in almost a similar way that the Jewish Left did, to energize the gullible and naive black folk of America to bring about changes---fundamental transformations---in America, by placing blacks in positions of authority.

          The lies and FABRICATIONS, especially those concerning history, that have been promulgated by these people, have shall we say, hardened my heart.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by mccannon01 5 days, 23 hours ago
            "The lies and FABRICATIONS, especially those concerning history, that have been promulgated by these people, have shall we say, hardened my heart. " Understood. There was definitely a racial discrimination problem that was addressed by the civil rights movement of the '50s and '60s where a era of "content of character" superseding race was to be ushered in, but got betrayed in the '70s by the movement getting run over by "affirmative action". That morphed into political correctness which morphed into what is now DEI which has nothing to do with content of character. There shouldn't be a mystery why it isn't working.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 1 week ago
      I'm not Ayn Rand. As I have stated previously, my goal in publishing this thread is not to evoke argument; you cannot argue with reality. My goal is to inform world leaders of the actuality of what WILL happen in the future, should those descended from black Sub-Saharan Africans---New World and Old World---be able to obtain positions of power and authority, and the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa continue to have attempts at self-governance.

      You are stating that reality and truth are racist. That's abhorrent to me.

      And in addition, I am presenting the problem---the world's greatest problem today---in a way that expects humans to use their God-given brains to understand and solve.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 6 days, 5 hours ago
        "You are stating that reality and truth are racist." Nonsense. That is an absurd assumption.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 6 days ago
          I'm not sure you agree with me or not. Are you saying that my statement that referring to reality and truth as racist, is abhorrent to me, is nonsense?

          Perhaps you didn't understand the reasons, the relationships connecting premise and conclusion. I didn't make it clear.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by mccannon01 6 days ago
            "Are you saying that my statement that referring to reality and truth as racist, is abhorrent to me, is nonsense?" No, I'm saying your assumption that I think reality and truth are somehow racist is nonsense. Reality and truth can't be racist because they are what they are in the natural world and we have no say over them, A=A.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 5 days, 21 hours ago
              This statement was what I was referring to, and it appears I jumped forward a few leaps, and you thought I was talking about you:

              "However, IMHO, in our country it seems to begin its current manifestation in the roots of the abolitionist movement in the late 18th century although it was a counter point to race based slavery."

              But you're right, it is a sensitive subject, and the truth has been concealed from us for about seven or eight decades now. Even Disney's "Song of the South", which I thoroughly enjoyed as a child, was, if not banned outright, 'concealed' from the youth of the country. A certain part of the American populace felt the film showed Negroes in a bad light, showed them as childish. And we can't have childish appearing people in positions of authority.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by mccannon01 4 days, 21 hours ago
                I enjoyed "Song of The South" as well, but it is a distant memory. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney eradicated all the originals.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ 4 days, 20 hours ago
                  Joel Chandler Harris, who wrote these tales, spent time living with freed black people. And Mark Twain's tale of Tom Sawyer and how he convinced his friends to whitewash his fence for him is reminiscent of Brer Rabbit convincing Brer Fox to put him in the briar patch!!
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 5 days, 20 hours ago
              Finding Gone With the Wind anywhere on the Internet a few years ago was a hopeless task. I finally did find it, can't remember where.

              Mark Twain, the American's American was actually banned in libraries in America. Some of his works, like Huckleberry Finn.

              Twain was against slavery. He told an interesting story of a slave who had undergone a baptism, dunked in the water and so forth, and when he came up for air he said something like: "Some day some gemmun's n* gwine drown!" What that tells me, and should tell others, is that the slaves, supposedly driven by slave masters who cared nothing for them, KNEW they were valuable property to their owners. In fact, in the Deep South prior to the Civil War, it was a worse crime to kill a black than to kill a white. There were laws on the books providing for the protection of the slaves from abusive masters. But this was concealed.

              As was the informative book about slavery in the South, published in 1854, written by a Christian pastor, abolitionist, from a New England state, Nehemiah Adams "A Southside View of Slavery" who compares the northern abolitionist's view, as represented by Harriet Beecher Stowe in Uncle Tom's Cabin as totally representative of the institution, and states that this would be analogous to comparing every voyage of a mariner to that of Robinson Crusoe.

              Intentionally concealing the truth, so as to ...well, at this point, I will just say, the 'motive is ulterior'.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by mccannon01 4 days, 21 hours ago
                "Gone With The Wind" is a wonderful classic movie. The wokies tried to have it relegated to the Orwellian memory hole along with Aunt Jemima and Uncles Ben and Remus.

                When I was young I read the original "Tom Sawyer" and "Huckleberry Finn" and can see right away the versions allowed now have been heavily sanitized.

                Another interesting book you may want to check out is "Black Slave Owners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790 - 1860" by Larry Koger. I guess when the author was in college he asked the question, "Did any free blacks in the south own slaves of their own?" The professor didn't know and suggested he research the topic and the results is the book.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ 4 days, 20 hours ago
                  Truth in the well, now emerging with her whip!

                  Ghana was the last nation in the world to outlaw slavery, in 1998. For some, though, it is not comprehensible that black people could own other black people as slaves.

                  A great study done during Reconstruction in the South, by a northern reporter who had at one time been an abolitionist is "The Prostrate State: South Carolina Under Negro Government", by James Shepherd Pike, 1874. Corruption and debt grew exponentially. (Some have said that South Carolina caught the brunt of the North's fury, as the 'rebellion' began in that state. I don't know.)

                  A more recent book, a study on IQ, that has been concealed, is "The Bell Curve" by Herrnstein and Murray, 1990's sometime. A chapter has been given over to the findings, statistically and conclusively, that the average IQ of American blacks is one standard deviation---fifteen points---below the average for all other Americans.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by freedomforall 4 days, 19 hours ago
                    The Bell Curve is available for free download at:
                    https://archive.org/details/bell_curv...
                    See Chapter 13 for the detail that SpiritWoman mentions.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ 4 days, 19 hours ago
                      Thanks. I didn't know The Bell Curve was on Internet Archive. Doesn't it have a copyright?

                      I actually bought the book.

                      Tell me, freedom. Do you think someone with a college degree is always "smarter" than someone without one? Or even, in fact, more knowledgable?
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by freedomforall 4 days, 18 hours ago
                        I have a copy of the book somewhere, too.
                        When I attended college the first 2+ years were a waste of time for me (except for one class in Calculus that covered topics beyond my high school class.) Eventually there were classes that were in my chosen field of study and some of those were very useful after graduation in business. But I learned more valuable information in my day job (which was in my field if study) while attending college at night than in my classes.
                        To answer your question, no, I don't think someone who completes a college degree is necessarily 'smarter' than someone without a degree. Some people benefit much more from the experience and others do not. For some it can be a waste of time and/or a deterioration of their abilities. For others, the friendships forged there are the most important factor to their later success.
                        Too many variables affecting the results. Brilliance is shown in many ways.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ 4 days, 18 hours ago
                          And I don't remember if I have mentioned this, but in my 'perambulations' among the hallowed walls of academia throughout the years, I noticed a definite free fall not only in the knowledge imparted to students, but in how these students were taught (or not taught) to think. Courses became easier, less homework, tests were multiple choice, not essay, and when I purchased the text I used for physics many years ago, I found it had been dumbed down to the point where all one had to do was memorize bullet points. Well, not QUITE that bad, but close. When I asked why I was told that black students had complained the texts were too difficult.

                          So, yes, I have had personal experience in the decay of learning and the disorganization in modern scholarship.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ 4 days, 18 hours ago
                          Absolutely. My feelings too. I don't have a degree, of any sort, even after about forty years, off and on, of college courses, including a Masters' course in Global Macroeconomics, which the professor called "International Finance".

                          But I've been called a mathematical genius, and a polymath by those WITH advanced degrees in both math, science, economics, etc. and I number among my friends some Nobel Prize winners.

                          Yet there are some around who would decide that I am not as 'smart' as they are. For example, the former 'president' of the U.S., Obamma, felt that no one, absolutely no one, could be as smart as the president!!
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jack1776 1 week, 3 days ago
    Oh boy, you pissed on the third rail. (standing or squatting) LOL

    I don’t believe you’re wrong, in fact I believe the same. We all have strengths and weaknesses which are traits passed down to us through our DNS from our ancestors. Our ancestors developed in specific conditions and as such, natural selection was made to favor one trait above another. I’m from Scotch-Irish ancestry, I must accept the cards I have. I have traits that make be better or worse in specific areas. I must accept that I might have to work harder in some areas to overcome a weakness.

    If I said that, generally, black people are better at basketball then white people, would I be wrong? Are there good white basketball players (Larry Bird) and shitty black basketball players (Gary Coleman), sure. But generally black people are better at sports (besides hocket, they don’t like hockey, I think it has something to do with ice.)

    I think the term racist is overused just like nazi as of late. Black people, generally, are the worst racist. I’ve had many encounters with highly racists black people because they have been told its justified. Here is the thing I find odd, generally speaking, I find that all other races are justified in expressing their racism against the white race, but it's not allowed the other way. Why is that? News flash, white people were not the only races involved in slavery. It was a way of life in antiquity among all races.

    Personally, I think this overblown race issue is by design, its design to cause strife and contention. It’s part of the Marxist revolution we are in the middle of.

    No, I don’t think you’re wrong, I think you should celebrate your heritage just like anyone else of another color. I also think you should draw upon your experience when making initial assumptions about others, if you say you don’t do this, you’re worse than a racist, you’re a liar. I find it completely acceptable to enter new relationships with people, assuming traits from your experiences and making assumptions until proven invalid. This is pattern recognition and humans are very good at it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
      You also, need to read Piaget. The young child, who doesn't argue, formally argue, uses simple affirmations, and if other children do not believe him, he resorts to ridicule, bullying, and other types of 'argument'. We refer to that as a quarrel.

      Think carefully before using off-color language with me the next time. Should there be a next time.

      How's that bakery going?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jack1776 1 week, 2 days ago
        Odd that you let a little bit of colorful language distract you from your argument on race. Interesting... In case you missed it; I was agreeing with you.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • -2
          Posted by $ 1 week ago
          It doesn't matter to me whether you agree with me.
          1. Your use of off-color remarks are offensive to me.
          2. Your agreement is not based on logical, formal argument. It is based on what you desire to be true.

          And lastly, I am not presenting an argument in which I expect you to try to refute me. I said, above, it is instructional, mainly, for world leaders. It is also instructive for the world's peoples, given they can drink the water having been led to it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 1 week, 3 days ago
    And by the way, just in the case that some may call me 'whiny', remember being whiny does NOT equate to being angry. Angry people can change things, once they understand why they are angry, and then use reason to fix things.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo