Survivor Pharyngula: The Second Round

Also, it would be nice if a discussion on racial relations in the US didn't focus just on blacks and whites. There are other people you know whose voices deserve to be heard.

When has any such discussion been limited to discussion Black folks and White folks?

What O'Connell found was that blacks and latinos lagged behind whites and Asians even when matched for socioeconomic status and that the gap was actually the widest between wealthy whites/asians and wealthy latinos/blacks, contrary to all of the conventional wisdom. He blames it on systemic oppression, but you can also infer other hypotheses.

You may certainly infer another hypothesis. Now, performs studies and do meta-analysis of existing studies, and have this peer-reviewed and replicated. Then your hypothesis can be discussed realistically. Culture will have a heavier hand than any genetic variation (go ahead, find those genes and their products and how they operate in the network of processes to produce real "racial" differences.)

The newspaper article references an actual study carried out by the state of California, Ichthyic. It clearly contradicts the conventional liberal wisdom that socioeconomic status means everything. You're just angry because a study has refuted one part of your world view.

Fuck the newspaper article. What is your interpretation of the actual study? Have you read it? What I see is your interpretation of a newspaper's interpretation of a study and what was said about it - hardly a clear contradiction.

See how Ichthyic is emblematic of the intellectual dishonest of many on here? He insists on evidence. I provide a link to a fairly damning piece of evidence as such. How does he respond? DOes he address the evidence substantively? No. he just.... dismisses it!

I cited an article that referenced a study carried out by the state of California which clearly shattered the liberal myth that socioeconomic factors were the primary reason behind the race gaps.

As you have dismissed all other studies and conclusions opposing this. A newspaper article, again, is not evidence.

Read more carefully idiot. 84% stated that they believed there were races.

Nice try. And how was "race" defined for this poll? Poll methodology released and peer-reviewed?

A lot of biologists do use "race" as a useful term, usually given a clear operant definition for the purposes of exactly one study. You cannot use race to assume traits, but you can use traits to inform the definition of race for a particular purpose. The rather extremely large lack of differences between "races" argues against any meaningful differences in scoring intelligence, while cultural aspects handily fit the bill. The largest use in biology for the term race, where it may have an effect on how a person is medically diagnosed for symptoms of a medical problem, is due to genetic variation in response to disease vectors mostly unique to geographical division. The public perception of race has little to no relation to scientific use of the term, excepting where the scientists may me racist themselves. (Eugenics, baby.)

How about this: Where do your race definitions begin and end? Let's play with white people. There have been times where large groups of Europeans with whiter skin have been divided geographically into groups where hair color was mostly red, or blond, or black, or brown. (Actually, there is still a noticeable geographic gradient.) Are these different races? If not, then why are e.g., the Mon a different race than I (mostly Euro-mutt American)?

But never mind, this thread is not about your theories, it is about the banhammer. Not your meta-banhammer meta-defense. You are sucking canal water here, fuckwit.