Academic defends himself against 'racist' claims

Former Member · March 2006

I think he's got the right to free speech, like everyone else, but I don't think he should be employed to teach people he believes are inferior.

So you'll get quiet racists.

Let the man speak for fucks sake. How else do you avoid this type of loon? God help you if you become friends with one of these types and after months of friendship he says he can't come to the pub "because it's the Fhurer's birthday" or something.

"...were one to take the 'white' and the 'male' out of science and technology, one would have no science, just witchcraft, third world squalor, misery and mega-incompetence." - Frank Ellis

Historically he's right. he doesn't see that it's due to societal conditions and so on, but his statement is factually accurate. Most stuff and important thought has been done by white, middle aged men.

That's because people who aren't allowed to leave the house except to have babies or are chained to ships don't get a right lot of physics done, just this fathead can't see it.

Former Member · March 2006

I don't know - if the tables were turned, I don't think I'd be too happy about turning work in to a lecturer who thought I was genetically predisposed to be stupid because I'm white.

Former Member · March 2006

I don't know - if the tables were turned, I don't think I'd be too happy about turning work in to a lecturer who thought I was genetically predisposed to be stupid because I'm white.

Neither would I. There'll be one somewhere though. And keeping them quiet really isn't a solution, is it?

It's incredibly annoying to have certain opinions, beliefs and attitudes out of open discussion, theres no informed choice and it leads to a distorted view of mass agreement which might not be the case.

Most middle class folks would be horified to hear a bunch of factory workers on their lunch break, for instance, and those workers feel that what they see as legitimate views are being ignored. Then we get the BNP being voted in here and there.

Former Member · March 2006

klintock wrote:

Historically he's right. he doesn't see that it's due to societal conditions and so on, but his statement is factually accurate. Most stuff and important thought has been done by white, middle aged men.

That's because people who aren't allowed to leave the house except to have babies or are chained to ships don't get a right lot of physics done, just this fathead can't see it.

thats so true its almost satirical

Former Member · March 2006

This man clearly holds some odious views but the idea that people should eb treated as individuals rather than as members of groups is a good one, even if it is reached for the wrong reasons..........

Former Member · March 2006

I have a African father and a European mother so I suppose I have the best of both worlds but In the end of the day it is odvious that generally black people have far better athletic skills and white people generally have better intelligence levels it is harder to measure though. The brain is a muscle too and to deny that intelligence isnt related in any way to genetics is wrong. I agree with the above. We need to be treated as individuals and I am sick of being categorised in terms of race. People call me black but Im not. Im mixed but most importantly Im an individual. As soon as we stop refering to people in terms of race the quicker we begin to think of each other as individual humans.

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

I have a African father and a European mother
<snip>

I'm not racist, but...
Some of my best friends are black...

etc etc

:rolleyes:

Former Member · March 2006

Frank Ellis should have the right to speak.

The student body of Leeds should have the right to kick seven shades of shit out of him for saying it.

Problem solved.

Former Member · March 2006

The student body of Leeds should have the right to kick seven shades of shit out of him for saying it.

"Freedom of listening" - I kinda like it.

Former Member · March 2006

Call me a racist Blagsta because it would be quite funny

Former Member · March 2006

I think you're confused.

Former Member · March 2006

Well then perhaps you should have explained exactly what you meant. :chin:

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

Well then perhaps you should have explained exactly what you meant. :chin:

he rarely does.

Former Member · March 2006

I thought you had me on ignore.

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

Well then perhaps you should have explained exactly what you meant. :chin:

Its quite simple - there is no evidence to support your assertion that white people are genetically more intelligent and black people are gentically better athletes. None, zilch, nada. Geddit?

Former Member · March 2006

Its quite simple - there is no evidence to support your assertion that white people are genetically more intelligent and black people are gentically better athletes. None, zilch, nada. Geddit?

Theres plenty, just that the tests that lead to those conclusions are probably flawed.

If you accept that bellcurves are valid, like most nsurance companies do, then theres loads of evidence. If you don't accept that bell curves are valid, like handwringing lefties who know fuck all about statistics and have already made their minds up that we are all equal then there is no evidence.

Former Member · March 2006

There are only 800 million blacks, or one in eight of the world population, but athletes of African origin hold every major world running record from the 100 meters to the marathon. In the United States, where African Americans make up about 13% of the population, almost 90% of professional basketball players, 70% of the National Football League, and more than a third of professional baseball is black. In Britain, with a black population of less than 2%, one in 5 professional soccer players is black. Blacks have also come to dominate world boxing.

The "evidence" suggesting that white people are generally more intelligent is much harder to measure because of social and economic barriers to education.

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

There are only 800 million blacks, or one in eight of the world population, but athletes of African origin hold every major world running record from the 100 meters to the marathon. In the United States, where African Americans make up about 13% of the population, almost 90% of professional basketball players, 70% of the National Football League, and more than a third of professional baseball is black. In Britain, with a black population of less than 2%, one in 5 professional soccer players is black. Blacks have also come to dominate world boxing.

and why do you think that is? Genetics? Or social and economic factors?

Googler wrote:

The "evidence" suggesting that white people are generally more intelligent is much harder to measure because of social and economic barriers to education.

Well, exactly, this is precisely the point.

Former Member · March 2006

According to IQ tests, people of afro-carrabean descent tend to score lower, but this has more to do with how ethnocentric IQ tests tend to be. It is not racist tosay so unless you are using those facts to demean people. If he pointed out the faults in IQ testing then it would be OK.

Former Member · March 2006

I think its genetics. People who have similar socio economic conditions from different races do not have the same athletic ability.

Former Member · March 2006

Just because something is hard to proove doesnt mean its not true. I still believe although we have racial differences these are still only generalisations and every person should be treated equally because we are all individuals.

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

I think its genetics. People who have similar socio economic conditions from different races do not have the same athletic ability.

What a crock of shit.

Former Member · March 2006

Your closed mind is the only crock of shit. You did ask the question knowing very well what I was going to say.

Former Member · March 2006

Googler wrote:

Your closed mind is the only crock of shit. You did ask the question knowing very well what I was going to say.

You're funny!

Former Member · March 2006

Blagsta wrote:

What a crock of shit.

It's a widely held belief though, one I ascribe to. If it's wrong, why so? Are there not genetic differences? I'm open...

I read last week in an article about body-builders that womens muscle is equal in strength pound for pound with mens- something I'd always assumed otherwise. Didn't address the fact that men are predisposed to a lower body fat percentile and men to gaining muscle easier though.

Former Member · March 2006

males athletic performance has a direct relation to how much testosterone they had when they were developing. conclusive tests have shown that african males have igher levels of testosterone than caucasion males. therefore, you could argue there is evidence that africans have the potential to be more athletic than caucasions (cant spell). i remember watching a documentary on it, this guy compared lots of young male athletes and examined indicators of how much testosterone they were submitted to when they were young. the one with the most (african guy) won the race. perhaps it was set up for tv, but i think the theory behind it is sound.

Former Member · March 2006

katralla wrote:

It's a widely held belief though, one I ascribe to. If it's wrong, why so? Are there not genetic differences? I'm open...

I read last week in an article about body-builders that womens muscle is equal in strength pound for pound with mens- something I'd always assumed otherwise. Didn't address the fact that men are predisposed to a lower body fat percentile and men to gaining muscle easier though.

The outward signs on which most definitions of race are based--such as skin color and hair texture--are dictated by a handful of genes. But the other genes of two people of the same "race" can be very different. Conversely, two people of different "races" can share more genetic similarity than two individuals of the same race.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000770CB-3D09-1FA8-BBAA83414B7F0000

Former Member · March 2006

TheShyBoyInTheCorner wrote:

males athletic performance has a direct relation to how much testosterone they had when they were developing. conclusive tests have shown that african males have igher levels of testosterone than caucasion males. therefore, you could argue there is evidence that africans have the potential to be more athletic than caucasions (cant spell). i remember watching a documentary on it, this guy compared lots of young male athletes and examined indicators of how much testosterone they were submitted to when they were young. the one with the most (african guy) won the race. perhaps it was set up for tv, but i think the theory behind it is sound.

Reference?

Former Member · March 2006

Ill have a look for it. Like I said, it was a documentary i watched a while ago

Former Member · March 2006

first source for testosterone being directly proportional to athletic ability:

http://www.chem-online.org/steroid.htm

Then in the 1950's many Russian and European athletes began to find that steroids were very beneficial to their goals and soon after began dominating the sport of powerlifting, crushing previous world records. In the mid 1950's it was proven that testosterone was the reason behind the improved athletic ability by Dr. Ziegler. Soon after he and his labs were producing Dianabol or Methandrostenolone. A decade later, steroids were available on the market. At that time they were being used by both athletes and doctors alike on a regular basis. On March 1st 1991, the Federal Anabolic Control Act was in effect

I will find a source saying africans have higher testorone for you later, its lunchtime now

but just a quick search there are references to it on the net, nothing 'hard proof' though.

Academic defends himself against 'racist' claims

Comments