Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    17 Mar '19 22:163 edits
    Many white writers like to deny the existence of racism in the RHP forums.

    Here's a recent post from the thread "White Men Are Not Everyone" in Debates forum:
    The post is at the bottom of page 3.
    The writer used the term 'scientific fact', which makes it relevant for this forum.

    https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/debates/white-men-are-not-everyone.180441/page-3#post_4011409

    "it is *scientific fact* blacks are less intelligent [than whites] just
    what is racist about acknowledging that fact?"
    --Mott-the-Hoopie (17 March 2019)

    Some other writer(s) have hastened to support that claim.

    Is Mott-the-Hoopie's claim a 'scientific fact'?
    Could his claim be influenced by racism (which supposedly is rare)?
    What does it mean about someone who believes it or propagates it?
  2. Joined
    28 Feb '19
    Moves
    4750
    18 Mar '19 00:26
    Clearly explained in the movie Django unchained.
    Leonardo DiCaprio explained how the African American skull has 3 bumps in the skull. Preventing common sense.
    Scientific fact.
    Movies don't lie.
  3. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14726
    18 Mar '19 02:39
    There is plenty of racism out there. Here is a website showing racism toward Australian Natives.

    https://www.tremr.com/Duck-Rabbit/the-iqs-of-australian-aborigines
  4. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Mr. Wolf
    at home
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    18 Mar '19 06:18
    @Metal-Brain
    Correct.
    It clearly does.

    The final paragraph;
    As brain size is a significant determinant of intelligence
    (Vernon et al., 2000), the smaller average brain size of the
    Aborigines can be regarded as partly responsible for their lower IQ."


    is a blatant lie. Brain size is not indicative of intelligence.
  5. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    18 Mar '19 07:2711 edits
    Me speaking as a 'brown' writer here (half-caste), Of course there are many 'white' writers with racist views and many would claim that their so expressed racist views to be 'scientific'; no surprises there. But, just in case someone here would imply the contrary, note I see no evidence that the majority of 'white' writers or 'white' scientists are racist; quite the contrary. And note that when I say this, I am more 'brown' than 'white', AND I have several times been a victim of racism myself, so, just in case someone here would think the contrary, and at the risk of making myself sound slightly politically incorrect, it isn't as if I am trying to (biasedly) defend 'my own kind' in particular.
    I merely note my observations of racism often going the other way i.e. racism against whites!
  6. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14726
    18 Mar '19 11:37
    @wolfgang59 said
    @Metal-Brain
    Correct.
    It clearly does.

    The final paragraph;
    As brain size is a significant determinant of intelligence
    (Vernon et al., 2000), the smaller average brain size of the
    Aborigines can be regarded as partly responsible for their lower IQ."


    is a blatant lie. Brain size is not indicative of intelligence.
    "is a blatant lie. Brain size is not indicative of intelligence."

    I agree.
  7. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52849
    18 Mar '19 14:49
    @wolfgang59
    Otherwise we would not stand up so well against Neandertals, eh since they have brains quite a bit larger than ours.
  8. SubscriberPonderableonline
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    527642
    18 Mar '19 14:58
    @Duchess64

    It is a fact that blacks score lower on IQ-tests.
    It is also a fact that IQ-tests are very snsitive to culture and upbringing.

    It is not a fact that People of any Skin colour are more "intelligent" tha those of others.

    Racism in a lot of flavours is frequently encountered at RHP and in the scientific community...sadly enough.
  9. Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    7459
    18 Mar '19 17:56
    @ponderable said
    @Duchess64

    It is a fact that blacks score lower on IQ-tests.
    It is also a fact that IQ-tests are very snsitive to culture and upbringing.

    It is not a fact that People of any Skin colour are more "intelligent" tha those of others.

    Racism in a lot of flavours is frequently encountered at RHP and in the scientific community...sadly enough.
    Despite the obviously faulty logic and lack of evidence, many racist ideas still propagate. Since there is no (modern-day) advantage to racist thoughts or actions, it makes you wonder why does it remain prevalent? Some would argue that racism is a biologically-programmed default behavior, and that the state of tolerance or acceptance must be trained/taught through personal examples and learned behavior.
  10. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    18 Mar '19 18:17
    @wolfgang59 said
    @Metal-Brain
    Correct.
    It clearly does.

    The final paragraph;
    As brain size is a significant determinant of intelligence
    (Vernon et al., 2000), the smaller average brain size of the
    Aborigines can be regarded as partly responsible for their lower IQ."


    is a blatant lie. Brain size is not indicative of intelligence.
    On average, men have bigger brains than women do.
    Sexists believe that makes women inferior in intelligence.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    18 Mar '19 18:231 edit
    @humy said
    Me speaking as a 'brown' writer here (half-caste), Of course there are many 'white' writers with racist views and many would claim that their so expressed racist views to be 'scientific'; no surprises there. But, just in case someone here would imply the contrary, note I see no evidence that the majority of 'white' writers or 'white' scientists are racist; quite the contr ...[text shortened]... ular.
    I merely note my observations of racism often going the other way i.e. racism against whites!
    It's absurd to claim or imply that, in RHP forums evidently dominated by white men,
    that any alleged racism against white people is comparable to the ample, often
    overwhelming, real racism against non-white people.

    Nazis liked to point out that some Jews were prejudiced against 'Aryan' Germans.
    So that makes it 'even' with Nazi prejudice against Jews, right?

    I know that some nominally non-white people like to pander to white racists
    and be their apologists in order to advance in their careers. A few black people
    have worked for and (shamelessly) praised the overtly racist Donald Trump,
    denying his racism in public, and, in return, he has paid them well to lie.
  12. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    18 Mar '19 18:46
    @wildgrass said
    Despite the obviously faulty logic and lack of evidence, many racist ideas still propagate. Since there is no (modern-day) advantage to racist thoughts or actions, it makes you wonder why does it remain prevalent? Some would argue that racism is a biologically-programmed default behavior, and that the state of tolerance or acceptance must be trained/taught through personal examples and learned behavior.
    "Since there is no (modern-day) advantage to racist thoughts or actions …"
    --Wildgrass

    FALSE. In reality, white people benefit directly from continuing racism favoring
    white people in Western societies. So white people have a vested interest in racism.
    Only a few white people seem honest enough to acknowledge this reality.
  13. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    18 Mar '19 18:50
    @ponderable said
    @Duchess64

    It is a fact that blacks score lower on IQ-tests.
    It is also a fact that IQ-tests are very snsitive to culture and upbringing.

    It is not a fact that People of any Skin colour are more "intelligent" tha those of others.

    Racism in a lot of flavours is frequently encountered at RHP and in the scientific community...sadly enough.
    "Racism in a lot of flavours is frequently encountered at RHP …"
    --Ponderable

    'A lot of flavours'? The only diversity in racism "frequently encountered at RHP" is
    in the somewhat different kinds of racism vented against different non-white groups.
  14. Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    7459
    18 Mar '19 19:41
    @duchess64 said
    "Since there is no (modern-day) advantage to racist thoughts or actions …"
    --Wildgrass

    FALSE. In reality, white people benefit directly from continuing racism favoring
    white people in Western societies. So white people have a vested interest in racism.
    Only a few white people seem honest enough to acknowledge this reality.
    As an individual you are better off hiring the best qualified candidate vs. the person with the most similar skin tone. As an individual you are better off treating every potential collaborator/friend/person as an equal vs. prejudgement based on skin tone/facial features. As an individual racism is counter-productive.

    As a tribe (e.g. white people) your reality may exist. But that needs to be assumed/cultured before it can be advantageous. There is no individual advantage to racist thoughts/actions.
  15. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    18 Mar '19 23:003 edits
    @wildgrass said
    As an individual you are better off hiring the best qualified candidate vs. the person with the most similar skin tone. As an individual you are better off treating every potential collaborator/friend/person as an equal vs. prejudgement based on skin tone/facial features. As an individual racism is counter-productive.

    As a tribe (e.g. white people) your reality may exist ...[text shortened]... cultured before it can be advantageous. There is no individual advantage to racist thoughts/actions.
    Wildgrass shows an inadequate (at best) grasp of racism.
    In particular, he shows no comprehension of the real barriers encountered by
    non-white people attempting to enter a previously all-white workplace, even
    if it does not seem overtly racist.

    "As an individual you are better off hiring the best qualified candidate vs. the
    person with the most similar skin tone."
    --Wildgrass

    That untrue dogmatic claim has several problems.
    First of all, it's often unclear who's 'best qualified' because it varies according to
    the metrics applied and because the evaluation of qualification is quite *subjective*.
    Second, the concept of 'better off' also can be very *subjective*.

    A white executive may prefer to hire a white secretary who will accept (laugh with)
    his casual racist jokes than hire a non-white secretary who can type faster (one objective metric)
    but may report his casual racist jokes as harassment. So, in terms of self-interest,
    this white executive would be better off hiring the white secretary who accepts his racism.

    "There is no individual advantage to racist thoughts/actions."
    --Wildgrass

    Reality keeps showing that many people strongly believe otherwise.

    Harvard University bases its admissions in part upon scores on its 'personality test',
    where a Harvard official (almost always white) assigns a score to an applicant's personality.
    It has been revealed in court that Harvard consistently ranks Asian applicants as
    having significantly lower personality scores than white, black, and Latino applicants.

    Is there any objective basis to conclude that Asians have 'inferior personalities'?
    No, but it gives Harvard a very useful pretext to discriminate against Asian applicants.

    Ron Unz, a white American Jew who graduated from Harvard, has written that IF
    Harvard's admissions were based *only* on academic merit, then there would be
    a major increase in Asian admissions. Perhaps 40% (or more) of Harvard's undergraduates
    would be of Asian heritage. That would be utterly politically unacceptable.
    It presumably would horrify most white people to see 'too many' Asians in Harvard.
    So there might well be a popular demand to set a hard racial quota ceiling on
    Asian admissions (such as no more than 5-10% of undergraduate admissions).

    While 'blackface' has long been condemned as racist, to this day, Hollywood practices 'yellowface',
    *preferring* to hire white actors (in make-up to change their eyelid shapes, etc.)
    to play some major characters of East Asian heritage. Given that major roles of
    East Asian heritage are scarce in Hollywood, actors of East Asian heritage deeply
    object to being deprived of these opportunities on account of institutional racism.

    In the Debates forum,, several white writers have argued or implied that 'yellowface
    is NOT racist (though most of them concede that 'blackface' IS racist) because
    they believe that white actors are intrinsically superior to actors of East Asian heritage.
    So it seems to be a rather common white belief that white actors are *better* than
    actors of East Asian heritage at playing East Asian characters.

    In *every* Charlie Chan film, the Chinese detective was played by a white actor.
    Genghis Khan was played by John Wayne (who was very similar, right?).
Back to Top