WRONG! It is a REPEAT of the same definition that I provided a link for in #144 above ergo the fallacious allegation of "plagiarism" is meaningless. Furthermore it is ON TOPIC because post #1 displays the same Cognitive Dissonance as was identified in the later post. That makes it a LEGITIMATE CRITICISM of the disingenuous "scientific racism" agenda that has ZERO FACTUAL BASIS when it comes to "racist IQ" allegations!
Again/Last time. POST ON TOPIC PLEASE instead of just baselessly accusing/characterizing someone. I post meat, you try and rearrange/re-highlight the deck chairs on the Titannic.
What you are posting has been debunked numerous times already in this thread. Failing to acknowledge that it has been debunked falls under the category of Cognitive Dissonance. Pointing this out is perfectly legitimate since it directly applies directly to the debunked OP topic. In order for this thread to move forward the acknowledgement needs to be made that there is ZERO FACTUAL EVIDENCE for any RACIAL genetic connection to IQ. Failure to do so is Cognitive Dissonance per the provided definition.
The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test (2009) The racial scoring gap on the SAT test has now become Wider than has been the case for the past two decades. Many believe that in the years to come the gap may grow smaller, not because blacks are catching up to whites in educational achievement, but rather because the test makers are adding a writing component to the test that may be manipulated to Lessen Racial Differences and therefore reduce public criticisms of the test. For many decades The College Board has used a 200 to 800 scoring scale of performance for both the verbal and mathematical sections of the Scholastic Assessment Test. Now a writing component has been added to the SAT. From now on, students will receive three scores each ranging between 200 and 800. In the past a 1600 has been the best possible score on the composite SAT. Hereafter, the best composite score will be 2400. This means that this year's test results will be the last time JBHE will be able to compare black-white SAT scores based on the scoring system that has been used since racial differences in test results were first made public in 1976. [..........] Explaining the Black-White SAT Gap [...] But there is a major Flaw in the thesis that income differences explain the racial gap. Consider these three observable facts from The College Board's 2005 data on the SAT: • Whites from families with incomes of Less than $10,000 had a mean SAT score of 993. This is 129 points Higher than the national mean for all blacks. • Whites from families with incomes below $10,000 had a mean SAT test score that was 61 points Higher than blacks whose families had incomes of between $80,000 and $100,000. • Blacks from families with incomes of more than $100,000 had a mean SAT score that was 85 points Below the mean score for whites from all income levels, 139 points Below the mean score of whites from families at the same income level, and 10 points Below the average score of white students from families whose income was less than $10,000. [..........] Go ahead, Try rearranging the Deck chairs again.
Yet another DISINGENUOUS OUT OF CONTEXT post that attempts to NEFARIOUSLY promote the DEBUNKED "scientific racism" agenda! From the same source here is some of what has been EGREGIOUSLY OMITTED!
Excuses, Rationalizations, Excuses, Fudgery. I post Real data. Despite Rising Test Scores, Black Students Still Face Achievement Gap Standardized Tests by: James Wright Special to the AFRO - jwright@afro.com - August 23, 2017 https://afro.com/despite-rising-test-scores-black-students-still-face-achievement-gap/ "...Bowser was joined by D.C. Deputy Mayor of Education Jennifer Niles, State Superintendent of Education Hanseul Kang, D.C. Schools Chancellor Antwan Wilson and Scott Pearson, the director of the DC Public Charter School Board. The mayor noted that there were score increases in every ward and credited the professional development programs and changes in the curriculum that have occurred over the past few years. English Language Arts (ELA) and math scores Overall increased four and two percent, respectively. Black students increased their ELA scores by 2.7% and math at 1.2%. Despite the gains, African Americans still lag behind Whites, who had increases of 7.7% in ELA and 4.5% in math. In summary, 22% of Blacks showed proficiency in ELA compared with 82% of Whites, while in Math, African Americans 18.6% showed proficiency while Whites posted 75.7%. D.C. Schools Chancellor Antwan Wilson, who attended the Watkins event with Bowser, said “We must do more to increase the scores of Black students.”Bowser agreed with Wilson, saying that “we are now focused on closing gaps.”..... Wow. Those differentials are Draconian evidence the "gap" aint "closing" in the last few decades. In fact, it seems to be Growing due the much more significant gains of white students on the same tests. Whites widened the Gap: gained 5% MORE on Math scores than blacks, and 3.3% MORE in ELA/English. App 20% of DC Blacks... but 80% of whites, show Math and English Proficiency now. ` Go Ahead, try and rearrange the Deck Chairs again! "COGNITIVE DISASTER" `
Well at least we have a little more originality. We went from GravesGravesGravesNisbettGravesGravesTurkheimerGravesGraves to CognitiveDissonanceCognitiveDissonanceCognitiveDissonanceCognitiveDissonanceCognitiveDissonance.
Doesn't make sense. Reading, writing, and advanced math had no place in the Universe until just the last few seconds, relatively speaking. It has to be a genetic accident that some groups and individuals are more adept with letters and numbers. The ability to hunt and take meat, and to tear raw or undercooked flesh from the bone with strong teeth is the story of man until the last few seconds.
A poor relation of the Fallacies 'argument from incredulity' or 'Argument from ignorance.' According to it there would have been no time for man, Hominids, ot Mammals to have Evolved either. Not to mention time for the two Species of Chimps (each with a subspecies/Race) and 2 Gorilla Species, with 6 or 7 subspecies/Races to evolve. But they have. `
Cherrypicking NEWS articles now because ALL of the SCIENCE has been sucked out of your FAILED and DEBUNKED "scientific racism"? Yet another confirmation of Cognitive Dissonance!
And you have NO NEWS. You just Cherry pick MY Links/Leftovers. and NO REBUTTAL. ZERO. No one has less Links/News/Studies than you, except for the worst Conspiracy Link/Goof ever posted in the section your "Ancient-origins", total CRACKPOTTERY. That NO one else would have fallen for. I can understand why you're gun shy. And with the Large Washington DC Public Schools sytem with 20% Black Competency vs 80% White Competency, that's a STUNNING Cognitive Disaster in a LARGE Mainstream system.. no small "cherry." You LOSE again and you posted NO info of your own, and NO rebuttal of mine. ZERO. Just Last-Word Trolling Again. (but it did Bump up MY thread!) `
I am not obligated to post any studies since I am not the one PRETENDING that your odious "scientific racism" has any merit. The ONUS is ENTIRELY on YOU to meet the scientific BURDEN OF EVIDENCE. That you are failing quite spectacularly in doing so is amusing. Especially so when your own sources expose your disingenuous cherry picking and out of context misquotations. That your farcical "scientific racism" cannot withstand ANY degree of genuine scientific scrutiny is NOT my problem. To put is bluntly you need to seriously up your game and provide something of actual scientific merit. If you don't then your risible pseudoscience drivel is going to continue to be DEBUNKED whenever you post it because We the People deserve to know the FACTS rather than the mendacious gibberish that tries to hide it's prejudicial and bigoted intentions behind a transparent pretense of being "scientific".
As I said... You are under the obligation to post Links of your own..... OR, to at least refute mine with other than EMPTY dismissal as above. You can't just call anything you don't like "Pseudo" or "Sci Racism" or TROLL with our own "Cognitive Dissonance." It's on YOU To Prove those terms/charges/Characterizations YOU made. Those are YOUR Empty Charges until and unless you do. Got it? You have NOT. Just empty ad hom terms with NO CONTENT. You clearly picked up/PARROT those terms from someone else, but cannot back them. You merely TROLL and harrass/ad hom with them. Again POST ON TOPIC PLEASE
Wrong on all counts! I have provided credible links to substantiate my positions including the EVIDENCE of Cognitive Dissonance. Those links exist irrespective as to whether or not the OP bothered to read them. Furthermore I have used the OP's links to discredit his content by PROVING that the OP has disingenuously taken his own quotes OUT OF CONTEXT. That is the OP's problem, not mine. What is glaringly obvious is that the OP has FAILED to do what he is DEMANDING of others. It is the OP that is flinging around baseless accusations of "trolling" without substantiation. FTR here is the PF OFFICIAL definition of trolling; Pointing out that the OP is taking quotations OUT of CONTEXT is LEGITIMATE CRITICISM, not trolling. Pointing out that the OP is engaging in Cognitive Dissonance when faced with FACTS that REFUTE the OP's baseless allegations of "scientific racism" is NOT trolling. Pointing out that the OP is CHERRY PICKING from media articles rather than using credible scientific sources is NOT trolling. Pointing out that the OP is engaging on Pseudoscience rather than using CREDIBLE science is NOT trolling. None of the above meet the official definition because they all pertain to the OP topic itself. If anyone is disrupting the thread it is the OP with baseless ad hom allegations. The only reason I brought up Cognitive Dissonance is because it aptly describes what is happening in this thread. The OP is throwing "scientific racism" bovine excrement at the wall hoping that it will stick. When it is exposed via LEGITIMATE CRITICISM the Cognitive Dissonance kicks in and the classic behaviors can be identified in the content of the responses. For instance this ad hom attack on myself falls under the "resort to any other defensive means" definition of Cognitive Dissonance. Because the OP is unable to factually refute any of the Legitimate Criticisms of Out of Context, Pseudoscience, Cherry Picking, et al the OP has RESORTED to the "other defensive means" of erroneously attempting to discredit me personally. I am not obligated to provide competing scientific data in this thread. Instead I am doing what is known in scientific terms as "peer review". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review My engaging in peer review is establishing that quality of disingenuous drivel masquerading as "scientific racism" has no actual credibility because it fails even the most basic of scrutiny. That the OP does not appreciate the added value of Scientific Peer Review is yet another reason to expose that mendacious fallacy that calls itself "scientific racism".
I addition to your UNBACKED and Wacky claims of Pseudoscience Scientific Racism Cognitive Dissonance we now add the Studendous Goofiness that you are "Peer Reviewing" my posts. ! ! ! ! ! Peer Review is done by qualified professional scientists of other scientists work, usually before a paper/study is published in a scientific journal. It is NOT you Emptily claiming "Your post is Bad/Dissonance/Pseudo." YOU are Not (your def) """a qualified member of a profession within the relevant field""" You barely post here. You have NEVER posted a Peer Reviewed article here. (or probably ANYWHERE on this mb. Link?) Despite 26,464 posts on PF, you've barely posted on this topic, and have NO thread starts in this section or the 'Science' section. Zero. You can't "Peer Review" anything. My OP (among others), OTOH, cites and/or contains Links to several Science Journals and Peer Reviewed studies. Where are Yours? Your only ON TOPIC offer of major new info with a link was a STUPENDOUS BLUNDER CONSPIRACY Wacko website, "ancient-origins", which anyone with any knowlege would Laugh off the board I did. `
Uhm, what's the big news here? that intelligence is an attribute of recombinate DNA? Intelligence, like skin color, religion, hair/eye color, height, athleticism, beauty and one's family are all merely accidents of one's birth. Course the racist scumbags around here will crow about it being evidence of their own racial superiority as if it excuses their own stupid notions. But I can see how some stupid white people need to believe they are "SMRT" just like homer.
Apparently you are NOT familiar with the debate. YOU are on My/our side. And those who you like politically, are on the OTHER side, claiming IQ is mostly environmental/nurture, NOT Genes/nature. You are caught between Between reality and liberality. Actually, virtually All on the Race Realism/Heritable side do NOT put "whites" at the top of the IQ pyramid. Not Charles Murray of the Bell Curve, and Not me. You're so naive on the politics of the issue, you have the correct common sense conviction that IQ is mainly heritable, but don't know that common sense position is Illiberal and "Racist." You're "supposed" to say IQ is the result of Socioeconomic advantage, enviroment, etc (instead of the reverse/reality), not genes. ooof `
No, I am not caught between any such nonsensical alternatives. I am definitely on the side that claims that intelligence is an outcome of DNA recombination. What is done with that intelligence has everything to do with nurture/education or lack thereof. Oh no you see most racists (white boys in particular) need to feel superior to those they hate. So its not so much any group being above them, its all about the groups BELOW them. Go figger. OTOH, I totally reject the notion that intelligence is linked to race. the genes that dictate intelligence are entirely different that the ones that dictate skin color. For sure one could find some correlation between the two that would satisfy the biggest bigots, but such correlations as those tend to carry no real information other than the correlation itself. And then there is the other side of this argument. WTF does it matter if the average IQ of one racial group is higher than another? There are smart, average and stupid people to be found in every community. Unfortunately there are too many stupid people running around thinking they aren't.
And again, EVERYONE on "your"/liberal side Disagrees. You just repeated/affirmed Your dilemna and my assessment. Your made a "drive-by" post that shows know knowledge of the debate or it's elements... nor much in the realm of logic. But I'll indulge one element because it's important... "WTF does it matter if the average IQ of one racial group is higher than another?" Obviously it matters alot If one group is More (ON AVERAGE) financially successful because they are (ON AVERAGE) smarter, that's a logical and Fair outcome. If all groups had the same intelligence (ON AVERAGE) then Unequal (ON AVERAGE) financial outcomes, it might be called "Racism".... and some people are trying/doing Just that. And they are doing it unfairly and Warping/Polarizing our society with the charge of Racism, when it's really just the nature of more people with higher average IQ's in some groups than others. That's it. Could go into even more detail, but you are now Completely answered as to why Group Averages matter. `
I have no dilemma. It seems you think that there are only two ways to think and its either liberal or conservative. A truly sad way to go thru life, if you ask me. So you think there is a direct correlation between intelligence and financial success? What is the threshhold of intelligence to make money? I know a bunch of smart poor people and quite a few rich idiots dumber than a rock. Group averages don't matter. Individual performance does. You can go into further detail all day long, but your starting premise that "it might be called racism" gives proof to the bullshit you are trying to flog.
I agree. And while you are indeed liberal on everything except your impression that IQ is inherited, I have both Liberal and Conservative positions. I'm in the MATH/STEM party. Note I can demonstrate what I say with logic and sourced facts. And I know a 5'9 guy who can dunk a basketball. But you got a better shot at 6'9. Your poor attempt/FALLACY is called debate by anecdote/exception. You post what you "think", I post what I know. IQ Income Gameover.
Considering you think that posting a study on the impact of war stress on middle aged Vietnam veterans "proves that childhood SES causes adult IQ," it doesn't surprise me in the least you'd be as confused to think that "peer review" is where someone denounces another person's posts on an internet forum and cries "scientific racism!" in every other post. Not. At. All. Scholars engage in peer review (as in scientific literature reviewed by one's scholarly peers, not angry internet guys) when they review and submit opinions on each other's work, and the results published in scientific journals. https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/what-is-peer-review And when they peer review each other, they do so scientifically without use of political labeling. Denunciations by angry internet guys is not what peer review is. You have such a severe lack of a science background that basic concepts are completely escaping you. You're embarrassing yourself and don't even realize it.
Anyone can claim to be anything that they want to be on the internet but it DOES NOT MEAN SQUAT! Your "qualifications" in this forum are IDENTICAL to my qualifications. Both of us are PF Members which makes as PEERS as far as CONTENT goes. There is only ONE CREDENTIAL that actually matters here on PF and that is CREDIBILITY! In essence your "scientific racism" has ZERO CREDIBILITY! You have not been able to refute a single instance were I EXPOSED your Cherry Picking Out of Context bovine excrement. You have not been able to refute a single instance where I exposed your use of Cognitive Dissonance either. You have been EXPOSED for using Pseudoscience in MULTIPLE THREADS in this subforum by myself and other members. And all you have in response are puerile ad homs which is a classic example of Cognitive Dissonance.
What an apt description of the OP. However your PROJECTION of the OP's shortcomings onto others is where you have gone adrift but we all know WHY that happened.
No projection, you're clearly just severely scientifically lacking academic background. Beating the scientific racism/cognitive dissonance drum doesn't validate a single thing you're saying, and that you think it is, just further proves my point. And the endless giggling emotes just look like you've inhaled laughing gas.
