Re: Scientifically found Racial differences...

From: Ken Sisby (elrajo_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 09/18/04 

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:03:08 -0500

"P.Comm" <tjsrno@spampost.com> wrote in message
news:cYe0d.11981$w%6.8299@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I am mildly intersted in new studies. The stuff I had IS old - keep that
> in mind. Copy the first post, send the info to Jensen and ask him which
is
> still up to date right and which is wrong. If I was anything other than
> mindly interested, I'd have done that myself! :)
>
> "DesertCactus" <desertcactus@emailcorner.net> wrote in message
> news:f25f7f62.0409070638.7053f9e1@posting.google.com...
> > "P.Comm" <tjsrno@spampost.com> wrote in message
> news:<Fg3%c.1995$ip2.878@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >
> > It goes without saying btw, that westerners with proper equipment are
> > far more efficient at 'hunting' animals on a massive scale than the
> > natives - with their "western intelligence" derived equipment.
>
> It is not intelligent to hunt or fish animals out of existence and thereby
> threaten your OWN food supply! That lacks FORESIGHT - a hallmark of
> intelligence!
> >
> > I understand... the commentary surrounding some of your information,
> > said:
> > "non-blacks show higher reasoning ability" that's probably why I have
> > misunderstood, it wasn't clear. It is of course DIFFERENT reasoning
> > abilities, (if true) not 'better' or 'worse' which are relative terms.
>
> YES, that's what I think when I read it - keep in mind I didn't write
that,
> I simply typed it up from notes here and there.
>
> > The blacks may have far better or more suitable reasoning abilities to
> > survive in the kind of environment they lived in.
> > The blacks were of course evolving themselves, and their intelligence
> > continued to develop just as the other races' were but perhaps in
> > different ways.
>
> Yes, I'd think so - that applies to every animal on the planet! The ones
> that can't adapt - perish!

This isn't quite true. It is species that adapt not individuals. The fate
or contribution of individuals is not an issue. Adaptation occurs because
particular genetic mutations (literally mutations at the genetic level)
confer the ability of portions of a species to adapt to changing
environmental conditions. What those environmental conditions are is a
constant variable that includes co-evolution with other species. The fact
that humans are physically weak and defenseless compared to other animals
indicates that our adaptability is based upon our ability to reason and the
fact that we developed cultures that themselves evolved.
>
> > I don't quite know why we're arguing or even what we are arguing
>
> We aren't arguing.
>
> >
> > I already discussed in another thread why I think some traits
> > mentioned in your information are more important than others. It's
> > just my opinion though - you might disagree, which is fine.
>
> "important traits" are not a fixed or static thing. The only important
> thing is who is still here 500 years from now. THOSE traits that enabled
> them to be here - have their descendents here - would be important traits.

Not 500 years. More like 500,000 years. And survival depends upon many
factors that genetic adaptation cannot account for. Floods, earthquakes,
the evolution of other species in relation to our own. Yes certain genetic
"traits" equate to the survival of the species (again not the individual).
Our linguistic abilities, our reasoning power, our erect posture and our
ability to perspire (and therefor control our body temperature) are all
examples of "traits" that confer superior survival ability. But these
adaptations happen over thousands or millions of years. Since we are all
variants on the human genome, it is the adaptability of the genome itself
that is the issue. Never individuals.

> >
> > Sure the IQ tests may be designed to test the "western world" skills,
> > but Africa is westernized too, the world is westernized, people need
> > "western world" intelligence to do well.

IQ tests simply measure the ability of perform well on IQ tests. An IQ test
measures one's level of education. There are so many factors that can
affect one's ability to answer the questions on an IQ test that the test
results themselves have to be interpreted quite liberally.

>
> Africa is not westernied by a long shot - the guts, the inner being
> states/feelings of the people there may as well be ALIEN compared to
western
> civilization. Imo. People might soon need to have CHINESE intelligence
to
> do well - and that's not western either.
> > > >
> > > But of course
> > > > the humans are more advanced than the other races in some of the
other
> > > > characteristics you mentioned, for example sight, and hearing.
> > >
> > > And don't you think that better sight/hearing is also associated with
> > > reasoning - perhaps reasoning of ANOTHER kind?
 I do. Better olfactory
> > > senses too - I KNOW that can lead to reasoning, but that's never
tested
> and
> > > it's not seen as reasoning. I can taste/smell many things (why that
is,
> CAN
> > > be tested...) - and then know what's IN there and reproduce a recipe.
> > > That's not reasoning? Not according to IQ tests! I'm not using the
> part of
> > > the brain NORMALLY known to be associated with reasoning to do that.
> What
> > > about sense of smell - again, super tasters/smellers sure can sniff
out
> > > things from pretty far away compared to a person sleeping in a room
> where
> > > there is smoldering going on - and in which a fire WILL START - yet
the
> > > person right in that room can't smell it. Heh. That's a form of
> reasoning
> > > too, but it's not coming from that "reasoning part of the brain."
> Neurology
> > > is just getting started. They had to start from scratch when they
found
> > > that the SEAT of that kind of super high math ability is in the LIMBIC
> > > brain - not in the frontal logical centers. And so. People develop
> > > intelligence of a KIND that suits them in the ENVIRONMENT they are
IN -
> not
> > > in some OTHER environment that they aren't in - and eventually, I
think
> it
> > > gets handed down - somehow inherited. That sounds awfully
Lamarckian -
> but
> > > I have no other way to explain it. Genes? But for all these studies,
> only
> > > ONE KIND of intelligence or reasoning is ever looked at - and NO ONE
> ever
> > > imagined that the seat of that kind of super advanced math thinking
> would be
> > > in the LIMBIC brain. They all; though they knew what the limbic brain
> did -
> > > heh. This info I jotted down is from the 70s. Other people probably
> picked
> > > up on some of this, I'm sure they did if they are in the BUSINESS of
> "racial
> > > differences studies." Go read Jensen or something like that. Or
write
> him
> > > and ASK - show him what I posted (fix the words so letters are not
> missing
> > > because it's NOT readable (go get my first post on it)) and ask him
> about
> > > it. That's what I'd do if I was seriously interested.
> >
> > You're not seriously interested?
>
> I am mildly interested - after all, I read sci.anthropology LMAO - joking.
> I pick up tid bits here and there, hear about it from journals. But I
don't
> care enough about it to KEEP the info, or BUY the info. I actually jotted
> all that down back then because I was pretty surprised by it - and I
> wondered why NO ONE ever heard any of this stuff. I'm very very nomadic
in
> my thinking - not rigid at all. I also think way outside the box - a LOT.
> When I hear the word "intelligence" - I know what "they mean" when "they"
> say it. I see intelligence all around me - take insects. If they were
even
> 2 feet big - WE wouldn't be here! They have strategies for survival that
> BLOW the mind. AWESOME *** - even nightmarish! Most people don't even
> think animals the capicity to have intelligence. I'm in 100%
disagreement.
> Octopuses have better memories than 99% of the human beings alive. That
is
> intelligence too. What they learn, in the very short time they live with
NO
> ONE to teach them, no mother, nothing - is astounding. It surpasses a
human
> being's ability to learn by a light year.
> >
> > I understand what you're talking about above, that blacks may have
> > different kinds of intelligence, different kinds of reasoning
> > abilities.
>
> Yes. I have never met a black person that did not know what I MEAN when I
> say something, and therefore, when they say "you know what I'm SAYin" I
know
> what THEY mean. I run into problems with communication with whites a LOT,
> however. WHY? It has to be the way I'm communicating - my husband says I
> often talk almost in code, very very synthetically. I also can be
extremely
> concrete. Get to the POINT of something in a convo in real life. Blunt.
I
> have a high IQ. So then, how come blacks never have a problem "GETTING
what
> I MEAN" but intelligent whites do? I don't know. I'm blunt, seen as rude
> by a lot of white people and the more "all white" they are used to, the
more
> rude they see me. I never had a problem like that with a black in my
life -
> even when we were arguing and trashing each other LOL.
> >
> > > > > I don't know how reliable they are though, be nice to have some
> > > > discussion about this from others, a lot of these threads just end
up
> > > > being me, you and MIB refuting zealously what he is able to, and
> > > > ignoring the rest.
> > >
> > > LMAO.
> >
> > Not really a joke, when MIB fails to refute some points being made but
> > comments on others in the thread, it makes me think he is unable to,
> > even with his extensive knowledge. A lot of these threads become too
> > one-sided.
> >
> Heh, no kidding.
> >
> > > Here is an example of social perceptions - later being proven by hard
> > > science. Back in the days when getting into fights was no big deal -
> people
> > > used to notice that punching a black guy in the head kinda HURT their
> hand
> > > more than punching non-blacks. Like, DAMN, hard headed people.
Getting
> > > punched BY them may have felt like being hit by a person holding a
ROCK,
> > > too. So it "becomes known" in the social realm that "blacks have
damned
> > > hard
> > > head and hands." Well, it turns out they DO have DENSER bones than
any
> > > other race.
> > > Now, no one would have ever perceived that if people did not get into
> > > fights, LMAO. So then, the science tells you they have denser bones.
> What
> > > does that tell the X-ray tech? What does that tell anyone planning to
> get
> > > into a fight with a black person? What does it say about their
ability,
> or
> > > lack thereof, to FLOAT? It's a common notion that "blacks can't float
> > > well."
> >
> > > They excel at certain sports, but NOT at swimming at all.
> >
> > It's interesting the black pyshical differences make them excel at
> > some sports but they are terribly bad at others. If you look at
> > certain sports in the recent Olympic Games you'll see a whole line of
> > blacks in short distance running for example, but in other sports
> > hardly any.
>
> Yup - but say that the other way around - whites excel at some sports, but
> not in others! I'd hire a white guy for lifeguard. I'd hire a black guy
to
> chase someone down. See? People are different - and I think the
> recognizable groups of people are seen to be difference from real
> experiences with them. And I've seen it with my own eyes too many times -
> Orientals like Chinese, that kind - man, high IQ or no, they CAN NOT drive
> for ***. LMAO. What is it about making a god damned turn that's so
hard?
> Or staying in a lane? LMAO.
>
>

Quantcast