“We’re talking about white anxiety,”

Discussion in 'Race Relations' started by Guno, Sep 29, 2017.

  1. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,703
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Couric is a known, proven liar. Why would anyone watch her ****?
     
  2. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So you agree northeast Asians have larger brain volume than Europeans and europeans larger brain volume than subsaharan africans?
     
  3. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No, I don't. There are no racial hierarchies in brain size which my sources have clearly shown and you have failed to provide evidence to the contrary.
     
  4. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Which primary source shows whites having equal brain volume as blacks
     
  5. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48

    You've been presented studies, including a random sampling meaduring brain volume using mri of whites and blacks controlling for age, gender and educational attainment and which found whites having larger brain volume than blacks. I am literally unaware of any primary study finding blacks to have equal brain and head volume as whites. Please present them. Please address the countervailing studies, and explain why you chose to ignore them.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2017
  6. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The study that you are referencing came to the conclusion that their research doesn't give any implications for the role that genetic and environmental factors play in their results.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0013642

    Our findings do have clear implications for neuroscience research. Racial and ethnic background accounts for some of the variability in brain structure and so this demographic needs to be consistently incorporated into neuroscience research. Although this demographic characteristic is limited and does not necessarily capture the complex genetic and environmental influences that likely underlie our findings, it cannot be ignored. This is particularly important for image processing methods dependent on population atlases [5].

    This was pointed out in your debate on Sciforum:

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/race-and-iq-differences.156169/#post-3376835

    Here is the problem with your argument. You assume that if you can show a positive correlation between brain volume and IQ and show measured differences in brain volume between racial groups that you have proven that reported racial differences in brain volume have some impact on differences in IQ. Here are the problems with your argument:

    1) Showing a correlation doesn't imply that a cause has been identified.

    2) The groups in a lot of these studies are socially-defined racial categories not biological races.

    3) While genes influence brain development so does environment and neither this or any study that I recall you posting has shown that genetic differences between the populations in question cause the reported differences.

    4) Variation in brain size between some geographic populations has been shown to be related to adaptation to different climate zones and have nothing to do with intelligence.

    5) Because environmental inequality exists between groups you can not be certain that environment is not 100% the cause of the difference in measured brain size. There are many environmental variables that could potentially impact brain development and gene x environment interaction is to complex to draw any conclusions about the cause even in studied that attempt to control for variables.

    For the following reasons finding a study that shows that brain volume/brain size/cranial capacity is exactly the same between any purported racial groups is completely meaningless. If you are trying to make a genetic or evolutionary argument about brain volume differences between races you need to provide sources for the following:

    - Evidence that human evolution has resulted in racial differences in brain size that cause differences in intelligence.

    This study or studies would need to do each of the following:

    1. Provide a scientific definition for race and show that the groups they use fit this definition.

    2. Provide scientific evidence that there are measurable differences in brain volume/brain size/cranial capacity.

    3. Provide scientific evidence from evolutionary biology showing that these differences are a direct result of different races evolving within the human species that exhibit heritable differences in brain size that cause intelligence differences.

    I don't know of any studies that have done this. The sources I provided specifically refute this argument.
     
  7. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No; the study does not attempt to determine causation. You're confusing this caveat with the study claiming it found an environmental variable acvounting for brain volume differences.

    It's incredible how dishonestly you spin the author's caveat.


    Here's the problem with your argument. You can't cite single study suppirting your unsubstantiated belief blacks and whites have equal brain volume. It's comical you're larping on correlation causation fallacies when you hold dogmatic beliefs flying in the fsce of evidence.

    Comedic gold.

    Yeah, except you don't have causation without correlation and so you have no argument on which to claim blacks and whites habe equal brain volume.

    This is needless to say one of the dumbest arguments made. You and that other poster were really scraping the bottom of the barrel to even try to argue this.

    So get back to me when you have your study showing blacks and whites have equal brain volume.

    How do you know? Prove it?

    Like what? And why doesn't this affect Asians?

    Which is your argument anyway?

    I thought you clqimed blacks and whiteshave equal brain volume.

    Provide a primary study supporting your belief.

    No i don't. I asked you the simple question whether studies show blacks qnd whites have equal brain volume?

    Why don't you try reading?



    "I'll make excuses to ignore why studies continuously show blacks having smaller brain volume than whites?"

    You mean, like the study you just linked showed measurable brain volume differences?

    So, what do you need to do to continue claiming blacks and whites have tge same brain volume?

    Oh, that's right. Provide evidence.

    No; you just invent excuses to tiptoe around facts all the while you can't one study out of dozens dhowing blacks and whites hsving equal brain volume.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2017
  8. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    As I stated in the other thread this is a strawman. My position is that there is no scientific basis for the claim that human evolution has resulted in racial hierarchies in brain size that cause differences in intelligence. I have provided plenty of evidence supporting that claim. If you dispute the claim then provide evidence to the contrary. I have never claimed that there is a scientific study that shows that "Blacks" and "Whites" have equal brain volume. My sources clearly state that socially-defined racial categories are not biological races. Terms such as Black and White are not biologically meaningful categories. If you don't understand the argument that isn't my fault. So you have a choice here, you can continue to ask leading questions which reveal that you are trolling or you can challenge my position with evidence.
     
  9. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There's no basis to believe blacks and whites have average brain volume. Literally every study disconfirms this notion.

    On what basis do you believe blacks wnd whites have equal brain volume?
     
  10. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    There has never been a scientific study that substantiates the claim that brain size determines intelligence and all studies claiming a racial hierarchy in brain size and intelligence have been shown to be invalid by empirical research. You can continue trolling over this issue as much as you want but you can't cite sources that refute my position.


    Start at 22:55



    I consider the whole brain size issue to be a red-herring. It's one type of indirect evidence which is all that Rushton has, in my opinion, in favor of his view. There is a group in Ecuador where some individuals have head sizes that are 4 standard deviations below the average. That's a lot! That's a huge difference. These people actually get better grades in school than the other people in their community. - Richard Nisbett


    Thus it is entirely possible that brain mass may have some relation to cognitive performance. However, one must take a statement like this with extreme caution (as the psychometricians do not). It is one thing to suggest that differences in brain mass may influence some aspects of cognitive performance. It is another to suggest that any observed differences in this trait result from solely genetic factors. It is even a greater leap to then claim that differences in reported cognitive performances between human subpopulations result from such a purported mechanism. The work concerning the neural basis of human intellect is in its infancy. - Joseph Graves

    Source: The misuse of life history theory: J.P. Rushton and the pseudoscience of racial hierarchy. In J. Fish ed. Understanding Race and Intelligence , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 43 -57 (2002)

    Finding a study that shows equal brain volume between racial groups is not necessary given that there is no scientific basis for claiming a causal relationship between brain size and intelligence. The scientific literature does not support the claim that there are racial hierarchies in brain size.....

    IQ and Brain Size. In humans the brain is large relative to body size. Gross correlations of the body size to brain size allometry seem to predict the relative behavioral difference at the species level well. However, there is no direct evidence that such data accurately reflect anything within species. One of the fundamentally unresolved questions in research concerning early hominid evolution is how much brain size is necessary to control how much intelligent behavior. We know that large areas of the human brain can be destroyed without altering human behavior in any way.

    Thus, there seem to be many reserve neurons in the human brain that we can normally do without. We know nothing for certain about how selective pressures in early hominids might have led to increasing brain capacity. We also know nothing for certain about the significance of individual neural capacity and its relation to intelligence (e.g., classic discussion on natural selection and the mental capacity of mankind; Dobzhansky & Montagu, 1947; Purves, 1994). Even if we were willing to accept the validity of standardized testing as a means for assessing innate cognitive ability (and remember, I do not!), there has never been a scientifically acceptable study that supports the hypothesis that intelligence (i.e., IQ scores) is dependent on brain size (Gould, 1996; Montague, 1974; Tobias, 1970).

    Even allowing Rushton's assertion that there is a different allometry between races, this would imply that on average within any race people with larger heads have greater cognitive abilities, and therefore score higher on IQ tests. Taken a step farther, this analysis suggests that within races, the average-sized man is endowed with greater innate cognitive ability than women simply due to sexual dimorphism in size.


    Rushton cited and dismissed Tobias (1970) concerning the inadequacy of studies of brain anatomy and measures of intelligence. A more objective analysis of this study shows that such a flippant dismissal is unwarranted. Tobias first reviewed the racist history of brain measures and intelligence. Throughout this study he pointed to inconsistencies of the racial data concerning cranial volume, body weight, height, brain weight, calculations of excess neurons, and so on. Table 3.7 give Tobias's calculation of the number of excess neurons in various human groups normalized by body size...

    These results are inconsistent with Rushton's views of intelligence and race (American Negroes > American Whites, French, and English). Again these calculations are not cited by Rushton, even though he cited figures that are consistent with his analysis in chapter 6. Tobias (1970) also cited a number of environmental conditions that affect brain size that could not have been controlled in all the previous studies of brain size (nutritional state, disease condition, environmental stimuli, occupational group, etc.). Finally, he also discussed a number of artifacts of preparation of brain samples for analysis that are not easily dismissed (cause of death, lapse of time after death, treatment of brain after death, anatomical level of severance, presence or absence of meninges, presence or absence of blood vessels). He concluded that all existing studies of brain size and intelligence were meaningless due to the abundance of these errors in procedure and interpretation.

    Source: The misuse of life history theory: J.P. Rushton and the pseudoscience of racial hierarchy. In J. Fish ed. Understanding Race and Intelligence , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 43 -57 (2002)
     
  11. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Do you mean every study on race and brain volume has been invalid because they all show differences?

    Again, how did you make the claim black and white brain volume are equal if you can't provide evidence?
     
  12. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No, I didn't say that. Are you having trouble interpreting the research I cited?

    The basis for making a comparison is invalid due to errors in procedure and interpretation of data for the reasons outlined by my source. You need to show that you understand what you've read before you continue asking questions. The position of my sources is very clear. There's no scientific basis for claiming that there is a causal relationship between brain size and intelligence within species and no study has ever been conducted that can validate the claim that there are racial hierarchies in brain size. There is no reason to provide evidence that brain volume between "Blacks and "Whites" is equal if there is no scientific basis for comparison.

    There are a multitude of studies that support this position which are cited in the articles I have presented. What studies can you cite that challenge this position? List them and we can compare sources.
     
  13. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So then how did you come to the conclusion there are no black and white brain volume differences if every primary study has found differences exist?



    You're conflating possible sources of error with confirmed sources of error.

    Then you make the leap in logic that unconfirmed sources of error means blacks and whites have identical brain volume. And what about ne Asians?

    How did you conclude blacks and whites have identical brain volume without a primary source?
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  14. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You're clearly having trouble interpreting the research. No measurable difference and no racial hierarchy are not the same thing. What the research is saying is that racial background does not determine brain size and that there is no scientific basis for comparison. It's that simple.

    No, there are confirmed sources of error. The aforementioned studies did not control for environmental variables that impact brain size. The studies are not controlled and not comparable making any comparison of measurement invalid. My claim isn't that "Blacks," "Whites" and "Northeast Asians" have identical brain volume but rather that there's no scientific basis for comparison based on the assumption that racial background determines brain size. Even if you could get a reliable measurement of brain size and compare populations or races you wouldn't be able to establish that those differences were due to genetic differences between the groups given environmental effects on brain size and development.

    The whole enterprise of claiming racial hierarchies in brain size determine differences in intelligence is based on pseudoscience. Again we can simply compare sources. Post your sources you think support your position and I will post mine.
     
  15. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48

    This is laughable. Again, back up your claim with a primary study showing that blacks and whiteshave equal brain volume.

    Really? What reseearch has actually done this?



    Again, your thinking inability is mind boggling. Just because a variable isn't controlled for doesn't mean the data is wrong.

    You automatically jump to the conclusion the data is wrong, and even more absurdly, claiming without evidence the variable(s) would result in equal brain volume. You hsve no evidence to make this claim since the data was supposedly not controlled for to begin with. Therefore how can you interpolate your claim with unavailable data?

    Funny. You made this claim on this thread.

    Either you have poor reading comprehension or are disingenuous.


    Literally the numerous studies are evidence. You're using words you don't understand, again.

    And yet posts ago you were claiming no difference in black and white brain volume and before that claiming as fact brain volume idoes not have a causal relationship with IQ.

    How did you conclude either of those claims?

    No it's not. It's based on the consensus of data that brain volume correlates with IQ and whites have larger brains than blacks.

    You hsve not disproven either of the above claims.

    So after i asked you for the 10th plus time for a primary source to your absurd claim you're demanding i post a source before you'll post one? I adked for your primary source well before any claim i made. A source showing blacks having smaller brain volume than whites has already been posted to this thread. You can't provide one primary source let alone any consensus.

    Honestly, this is the most mind numbing exchange I've had in quite a while.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
    Empress and Taxonomy26 like this.
  16. Taxonomy26

    Taxonomy26 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,611
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Virtually everyone acknowledges there are brain size differences AND also a Racial IQ Gap.....except Ejay.
    The only debate is how causal the relationship is.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Brain_size
    ...
    Brain Size

    A number of studies have reported a moderate statistical correlation between differences in IQ and brain size between individuals in the same group.[160] [161]
    And some scholars have reported differences in average brain sizes between Africans, Europeans and Asians. [162] J. P. Rushton has argued that Africans on average have smaller brain cases and brains than Europeans, and that Europeans have smaller brains than East Asians, and that this is evidence that the gap is biological in nature. Critics of Rushton have argued that Rushton's arguments rest on outdated data collected by unsound methods and should be considered invalid.[163]

    Recent reviews by Nisbett et al. (2012b) and Mackintosh (2011) consider that current data Does show an average Difference in Brain size and head-circumference between American Blacks and Whites, but question whether this has any relevance for the IQ gap. Nesbitt et al. argue that crude brain size is unlikely to be a good measure of IQ; for example, brain size also differs between men and women, but without well documented differences in IQ. At the same time newborn Black children have the same average brain size as Whites, suggesting that the difference in average size could be accounted for by differences in postnatal environment. Several factors that reduce brain size have been demonstrated to disproportionately affect Black children.[70]

    Earl Hunt states that brain size is found to have a correlation of about .35 with intelligence among whites and cites studies showing that Genes may account for as much as 90% of individual variation in brain size. According to Hunt, race differences in average brain size could potentially be an important argument for a possible genetic contribution to racial IQ gaps. Nonetheless, Hunt notes that Rushton's head size data would account for a difference of .09 standard deviations between Black and White average test scores, less than a tenth of the 1.0 standard deviation gap in average scores that is observed.[138][164] Wicherts, Borsboom, & Dolan (2010) argue that black-white differences in brain size are insufficient to explain 91% to 95% of the black-white IQ gap.[165]


    Et tu, Nisbet?
    +
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  17. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    This is why you got banned on Sciforum. You keep demanding evidence for something that has already been established by numerous sources and then pretend that your opponent is the one who hasn't provided evidence for their position.

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/race-and-iq-differences.156169/page-3#post-3377197

    [​IMG]


    Claiming that there are no studies that show brain size is equal between races is a strawman given the established fact that comparison between groups with the assumption race determines brain size is invalid for the reasons outlined by my sources.

    Nisbett's position is that reported measures of brain size differences between races are indirect evidence that can not explain racial differences in IQ given evidence that variation in brain size is under the control of environmental variables which differ between racial groups.



    However as we have seen from the plethora of scientific literature I have provided in this thread there is no scientific basis to claim that there are racial hierachies in brain size that impact intelligence and claims that race determines brain size are invalid. The research for reported brain size differences that Nisbett is referencing (Rushton et al.) has been discredited as racist pseudoscience whose researchers have failed to provide valid evidence for their claims.


    [​IMG]


    Continued....
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  18. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male


    No amount of burden of proof shifting and question begging is going to change the facts in this research and I will not answer any more of Rayznack's questions until he provides research of his own supporting his argument.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  19. Taxonomy26

    Taxonomy26 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,611
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How breathtakingly Sleazy and inaccurate, as usual
    As you probably Know/Saw, I didn't get banned for More than TWO MONTHS after my last post!

    And I got banned because YOU emailed your buddies there and told them why I went there:
    I took YOUR challenge that that was a better (Oooh) 'science' board than here.
    I [gently] Caught their Moderator 'Bells' LYING about stats (unanswered), and slaughtered the rest of them with with good sci/links and they did not/could not reciprocate.
    My 'Yelena': http://www.sciforums.com/threads/race-is-real.159634/page-9

    So After I revealed it to you, you admittedly emailed 'Bells',
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...taken-seriously.515633/page-3#post-1068088171
    and only subsequently did I get "banned."
    LOFL

    How ******* underhanded can you get!
    You made the challenge.
    I accepted.
    I slaughtered them.
    I left in good standing, and read the board signed in until a few days AFTER our conversation TWO+ MONTHS later.
    That was the end of it until I revealed it to you those months later, and then you communicated it to them.
    And ONLY after that did I get banned.
    My posts were excellent, credibly linked/good citations, and completely in bounds.

    As to the topic.:
    What a DESTRUCTION of Ejay.
    I Caught
    Him MISREPRESENTING Nisbet/HISbet!
    So embarrassed was he, he put up a Gigantic Two post Burial attempt.

    YOU LOST AGAIN EJay!
    Hung by your own Nisbet! (on 'Brain size', no less)
    +
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
    Empress likes this.
  20. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Lolwut?

    You haven't established jack. You keep claiming blacks and whites have equal brain volume but have not posted one single study supporting your claim.

    Literally, what primary study have you cited supporting *your* claim?
     
    Empress and Taxonomy26 like this.
  21. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    @Taxonomy26

    I don't know why you were banned. I wasn't told you would be banned. Obviously I private messaged Bells after you made your claims about posting on the thread and not being challenged by him. I also entered the thread to engage you so clearly I had intention to debate you there.

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/race-is-real.159634/page-10#post-3479017

    I looked you up on the banned list.

    [​IMG]

    You were banned a day after I made my post and there is no moderator listed for who banned you. The reason says "rules" so maybe once I drew attention to you they felt you violated some rule. Perhaps on sockpuppets? You can take it up with them.

    As for Nisbett I clearly responded to your comment. Once you learn how to spell his name correctly maybe you can respond. I also clearly provided primary sources for my claim that there is no scientific basis to the claim that race determines brain size and that racial hierarchies in brain size impact intelligence.

    So once again the ball is in Rayznack's court if he wants a serious debate.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  22. Taxonomy26

    Taxonomy26 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,611
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So Now (THANKS!), you are admitting you Knowingly Told a WHOPPER!.

    You said in your previous post "that is what got you banned" ("keep demanding evidence")
    Now you say "I DON'T know why you got banned."

    Is everyone on PF Now clear who/what we're dealing with here?

    You said I got banned for some content/course of business posting/cause, when you Now admit it wasn't until October 7.
    My last post there was on JULY 29th, and as I said, I left in good standing and read the board signed IN, until AFTER I told you, and you told them.

    Indeed, that's why I intentionally and cleverly waited a few months until the exchanges there were well over/a done deal before revealing them to you.

    Brain size and IQ.

    +
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
    Empress likes this.
  23. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you illiterate? I was talking to Rayznack. He got banned for trolling.....
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  24. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I must have missed the primary study on brain volume and race showing equal black, white and/or Asian brain volume.

    Care to post it again?
     
  25. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You must have missed all of the research I posted above showing that comparisons of brain size (or volume or cranial capacity) between 'races' to claim a racial hierarchy (e.g. race determines brain size which determines intelligence) are invalid based on empirical evidence. I don't know how you could have missed it. Surely you're not blind which means you are just being dishonest and trolling. Claiming that I need to post a study showing equal brain volume between races to validate my argument is a strawman. There's no scientific basis to make the comparison. That is the argument I'm making here which is supported by many sources and you have no credible sources that dispute this position. You need to learn a new trick because these troll tactics aren't working. This is what got you banned on Sciforum and you will get nowhere in a debate with me with this strategy.
     

Share This Page