E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-16-2011, 11:12 PM   #81
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,302
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
You sir, evidently have serious reading comprehension issues.
The quote you cited is from a publication by Carl Linnaeus from the 1700's. That's also the time when the best doctors bled sick people to release the bad blood or demons. They were absolutely serious about it, so it must be true, right? I doubt one can be that obtuse to bring up such theories in a modern discussion. The alternative is that you're a trolling.
I will not bother to debate with you.
cultural racism is nothing new. Saying Chinese mothers are inherently better than others is just new words to an old tune.

I'm glad, though, that you can admit that your arguments for Chinese mothers being inherently superior are as scientifically supportable as blood letting and humor balancing.
__________________

Last edited by NOVAbimmer; 01-16-2011 at 11:15 PM.
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 09:13 AM   #82
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
cultural racism is nothing new. Saying Chinese mothers are inherently better than others is just new words to an old tune.

I'm glad, though, that you can admit that your arguments for Chinese mothers being inherently superior are as scientifically supportable as blood letting and humor balancing.
I think his argument went further than that. If I read correctly he claimed that the Chinese are genetically smarter.
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 10:14 AM   #83
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
Do you always drive the speed limit? Come to a complete stop at every stop sign? Are you 100% on your income taxes? Did you claim that $300 you made at the blackjack table? Did you properly site every reference on every paper you ever did for school?
How does that have anything to do with the topic at hand?
Nobody here is claiming to be the "perfect" citizen.
What we are discussing here is the methods to raise children.
Someone noted that to evaluate a method we need to know what the desired outcome is, in other words, what's the definition of "sucess in life".
rapier7 mentioned academic success and financial success as metrics and suggested that they are correlated.
Someone else argued against that correlation, and breaking that link, if you just look at financial success, you could infer that a bank robber or a con artist could be viewed as successful in life and thus a model to be mimic-ed.
That's a ridiculous example, of course. We all know that, but how did we allow that example to even enter the discussion?
I simply posited that the people who mentioned those examples forgot the implied golden rule: that we're discussing parenting methods that are legal in themselves, and that should include the implied notion that "success in life" is achieved via LEGAL means.

Whether the individual will or will not ultimately observe the laws, and at what level/granularity is the individual's choice, but the parenting should absolutely not encourage anything illegal, as the con artist and rape examples suggested.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 10:20 AM   #84
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
cultural racism is nothing new. Saying Chinese mothers are inherently better than others is just new words to an old tune.

I'm glad, though, that you can admit that your arguments for Chinese mothers being inherently superior are as scientifically supportable as blood letting and humor balancing.
Again, you have serious reading comprehension issues.

I DID NOT suggest or agree that Chinese parenting methods are superior.
Not even the author of that article fully agree with that. I said, and it was validated, that what she said is largely true, but over-dramatized.
In fact, now we know that the attention grabbing title was concocted by the WSJ, with possibly out of context excerpts from her book.

Further, I also never claimed that anything I said is new. I offered points that could explain certain things, that people often times forget or can't see (not seeing the forest for the tree seems to be a common phenomena on these forums).
Since when it's a requirement to post novel and original ideas in an internet discussion forum? If that was the case, 99.99% of the posts here should be removed.
You yourself quoted ideas from 1700's to argue against what you thought was my point.

And you made another serious "comprehension" mistake.
My arguments were not in favor of Chinese Parenting techniques. My arguments had to do with one race being superior than another IN A PARTICULAR AREA of endeavor. That "everybody is equal" is BS in the name of political-correctness. That there's such thing as differences between races, passed on by genetics, and not just environmental or learned.
No matter how much you practice, you won't be in the Olympics if you were not born with the right genetics.
OTOH, if you have the right genetics, but fail to practice, you also won't be in the Olympics.
Chinese Parenting recognizes certain "strengths" in Chinese (academic success, music, etc), and puts focus on those skills.
Whether that is related to "success in life" can be observed in real life, as that's nothing new and has been going on for generations.
napier7 noted that Asians (particularly Chinese) are the most successful of all the "minority" groups.
Is that enough evidence for you or should we go dig in some 17th century book for answers?

Last edited by Master Po; 01-17-2011 at 10:39 AM.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 09:53 PM   #85
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,302
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
words words words
Chinese Parenting recognizes certain "strengths" in Chinese (academic success, music, etc), and puts focus on those skills.
My arguments had to do with one race being superior than another IN A PARTICULAR AREA of endeavor. That "everybody is equal" is BS in the name of political-correctness.
words words words
is your next thread going to be about how blacks naturally make better athletes and how their parents should be pushing them towards that?

Your thread is bringing up a racist argument, which is no more scientifically supportable (as you mentioned) than blood letting. I don't see why you keep trying to defend racism by mentioning the fact that I used an example of scientifically supported racism from the 1700s. Guess what? Schopenhauer did his work in the 1800s. But maybe that's recent enough for you to take into consideration.

I could find older examples of scientists trying to promote and justify the genetic superiority of one race to another if you'd like. Of more recent ones: the Germans were a big fan of so-called "cultural anthropology" in the 1930s and 1940s, perhaps we can take some lessons from them.

There are certainly differences between races. Things like variations in natural skin tone, hair type, eye color, facial structure, etc. These are observable and repeatable physical characteristics of a person. It's when you make the jump to imply that one race is somehow smarter, faster, stronger, better than another that you breach the gap from science to racist speculation.
__________________

Last edited by NOVAbimmer; 01-18-2011 at 02:37 AM.
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 10:04 PM   #86
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
is your next thread going to be about how blacks naturally make better athletes and how their parents should be pushing them towards that?

Your thread is bringing up a racist argument, which is no more scientifically supportable (as you mentioned) than blood letting. I don't see why you keep trying to defend racism by mentioning the fact that I used an example of scientifically supported racism from the 1700s. Guess what? Schopenhauer did his work in the 1800s. But maybe that's recent enough for you to take into consideration.

I could find older examples of scientists trying to promote and justify the genetic superiority of one race to another if you'd like. Of more recent ones: the Germans were a big fan of so-called "cultural anthropology" in the 1930s and 1940s, perhaps we can take some lessons from them.
Didn't you cite some old studies that said races are different and told me that it's old news? Now you seem to be saying that all races are the same and any mention to differences is racism and not supported by science?
What is your point? Do you have one?

Last edited by Master Po; 01-17-2011 at 10:06 PM.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 10:08 PM   #87
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,302
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
I cited old "studies" to show that your claim of one race somehow being inherently superior to another is an ancient claim that people have been trying to jusify for centuries. To claim that one race is inherently superior to another is a racist argument. Plain and simple. If you can find some real science that supports the idea that one race is inherently superior to another, I'd like to see it.

Maybe you need to go back and read some?
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 11:14 PM   #88
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
How does that have anything to do with the topic at hand?
Nobody here is claiming to be the "perfect" citizen.
What we are discussing here is the methods to raise children.
Someone noted that to evaluate a method we need to know what the desired outcome is, in other words, what's the definition of "sucess in life".
rapier7 mentioned academic success and financial success as metrics and suggested that they are correlated.
Someone else argued against that correlation, and breaking that link, if you just look at financial success, you could infer that a bank robber or a con artist could be viewed as successful in life and thus a model to be mimic-ed.
That's a ridiculous example, of course. We all know that, but how did we allow that example to even enter the discussion?
I simply posited that the people who mentioned those examples forgot the implied golden rule: that we're discussing parenting methods that are legal in themselves, and that should include the implied notion that "success in life" is achieved via LEGAL means.

Whether the individual will or will not ultimately observe the laws, and at what level/granularity is the individual's choice, but the parenting should absolutely not encourage anything illegal, as the con artist and rape examples suggested.
Woah there dude, I don't know anybody who brought up the "R" word.

The con artist and/or the bank robber is a valid schema if academic success and financial success are to used as the metrics.

If one can con a teacher in to a higher grade that equates to better academic success, does it not?
If one can increase ones net worth through criminal means that equates to financial success, does it not?

The point being that the use of these metrics is not the defacto answer many people seem to think they are or should be.
One can show that there are any number of ways to achieve those ends. Some may be "proper", some may be "improper". If the goal is to achieve those ends, how they are achieved becomes immaterial. When that is the case, all of a sudden the use of those metrics has a few more caveats. Propriety, legality, decency, compassion, etc.
Perhaps those are actually the most important aspect of parenting.

Does it really do a kid good to beat into them "there is only one place..first. Everything else is abject failure." "The minimum standard is straight A's, if you do not do that you are a worthless pile a s**t."

Teaching kids to strive, to work hard, to do there best, to do things "the right way" is important. But, it is also important for the VAST majority of them to learn "you won't always be the smartest kid in class no matter how hard you try" & "You won't always be the best (musician/athlete/whatever) no matter how hard you try."

There are kids who have gotten one B in high school and killed themselves. Or didn't get into (harvard/yale/mit/caltech/cmu/etc...) and killed themselves. Or the girl who didn't get into standford, told her parents she did, forged documents to show them, the whole 9 yards, and finally a couple of weeks after classes started realized she couldn't keep up the lie, and killed herself.

Every kid is different. Every parent is different. There are so many variables in the development of a person. There is no "superior" way. To think there is, is to fool ones self.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 12:47 AM   #89
Iceman00
I screwed up and can't post
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: FLA
Posts: 2,838
My Ride: E90 6MT
Someone define race to me, and tell me how it can be identified without referring to physical attributes.
Po, and others like him, use race as a way to bolster their low self esteem, taking credit for others accomplishments. I imagine it must suck knowing that Asian men are the least desirable(attractive) of all males, even to their own 'kind'.

Last edited by Iceman00; 01-18-2011 at 12:55 AM.
Iceman00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 02:27 AM   #90
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
My arguments had to do with one race being superior than another IN A PARTICULAR AREA of endeavor. That "everybody is equal" is BS in the name of political-correctness. That there's such thing as differences between races, passed on by genetics, and not just environmental or learned.
And just what is this asian genetic advantage?
They have a genetic advantage in the delicate manipulation needed for playing musical instruments because genetic required this more delicate manipulation to facilitate the masterbation of generally smaller genitalia?

Seriously, you are so full of s**t on this, your eyes are brown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
Chinese Parenting recognizes certain "strengths" in Chinese (academic success, music, etc), and puts focus on those skills.
If these "strengths" exist as you say, why is there a disproportionately smaller number of chinese Nobel laureates, relative to their population? If they had some genetic advantage there should be disproportionately more, not less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
Whether that is related to "success in life" can be observed in real life, as that's nothing new and has been going on for generations. napier7 noted that Asians (particularly Chinese) are the most successful of all the "minority" groups.
Should I even mention that a mexican is the richest man in the world. Also there are two dudes from India and another from Brazil who are all "minorities" on the list before we find the first asian on the list at #14.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 08:34 AM   #91
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
And just what is this asian genetic advantage?
They have a genetic advantage in the delicate manipulation needed for playing musical instruments because genetic required this more delicate manipulation to facilitate the masterbation of generally smaller genitalia?

Seriously, you are so full of s**t on this, your eyes are brown.


If these "strengths" exist as you say, why is there a disproportionately smaller number of chinese Nobel laureates, relative to their population? If they had some genetic advantage there should be disproportionately more, not less.



Should I even mention that a mexican is the richest man in the world. Also there are two dudes from India and another from Brazil who are all "minorities" on the list before we find the first asian on the list at #14.
Your questions are valid, but I was way ahead of you. See my post #15.
You're confusing me with rapier7. I am NOT advocating Chinese Parenting as superior.
However, your arguments (Nobel, Forbes list, etc) are all flawed. Just like your introduction of con artists as a valid parenting model. You arrive at ridiculous conclusions because you ignore/forget key assumptions that people take for granted (good parenting needs to include moral values).
Just ponder on this... Obama got a Nobel less than 100 days into his presidency. Is he really that good?

Your use of genitalia totally destroyed your credibility in this discussion. You've run out of arguments.

Last edited by Master Po; 01-18-2011 at 09:30 AM.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 08:39 AM   #92
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceman00 View Post
Someone define race to me, and tell me how it can be identified without referring to physical attributes.
Po, and others like him, use race as a way to bolster their low self esteem, taking credit for others accomplishments. I imagine it must suck knowing that Asian men are the least desirable(attractive) of all males, even to their own 'kind'.
You're so full of it. You know nothing about me.
Didn't you say (or implied at least) that you are Asian?
"I imagine it must suck knowing that Asian men are the least desirable(attractive) of all males, even to their own 'kind'."
Are you referring to yourself?

The only reason I introduced race was to lay the foundation for an argument that says parents of all races push their kids to work hard (of course some more than others).
But they don't all focus on the same activities. For example Chinese parents focus on academics and music (per article). Westerner parents might focus on social skills (sleep overs) while blacks might focus on sports (you should see some of the parents out there on the football field, a lot worse than the Chinese lady in the article). Why is that?
Despite your lack of theoretical knowledge (what constitutes race at a DNA or genes level, which is quite insignificant, I might add), parents know from a practical stand point (subconsciously, perhaps by learned experience) what works and what doesn't.
I was trying to make the argument that rapier7's position that everybody should learn from Chinese parents (and focus on academics) isn't a sound one. It'd be like forcing you to practice harder and harder because the NBA should be your goal. Let's face it, white men (and Asians) can't jump.

Last edited by Master Po; 01-18-2011 at 09:23 AM.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 11:59 AM   #93
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
Your questions are valid, but I was way ahead of you. See my post #15.
You're confusing me with rapier7. I am NOT advocating Chinese Parenting as superior.
However, your arguments (Nobel, Forbes list, etc) are all flawed. Just like your introduction of con artists as a valid parenting model. You arrive at ridiculous conclusions because you ignore/forget key assumptions that people take for granted (good parenting needs to include moral values).
Just ponder on this... Obama got a Nobel less than 100 days into his presidency. Is he really that good?

Your use of genitalia totally destroyed your credibility in this discussion. You've run out of arguments.
Hardly you stated and I quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
But look at the college acceptance rates... it's dominated by ABCs, not foreign Chinese students off the boat.

It's definitely in the genes and in parenting.
You are the one who stated that college acceptance rates among chinese are impacted by their genetics. By what grounds are you making this assertion? Put up or...
You have made no statement that "good parenting" needs to include "moral values" and who's or which "moral values" are these.

As for the other item. You are the one spouting off genetics with no genetic evidence to back it up. You are basing yours on on data point. So here are two for the genetics argument I listed.
If we work off the free-market economy model the Trojan prophylactic factory manufactures condoms in two sizes, 52 millimeters for the American marketand 49 millimeters for the Asian market.
Also condom mfg Durex published its data showing that of the 4 groups listed caucasians, africans, hispanic, & asian. The asian's had the smallest erect penis size.

The point again is lost on you, you saying that asian have some genetic advantage to being more educated or their college acceptance rates is total just as the penis size and musical aptitude is flawed.

However, the number of Nobel laureates does pimp slap your genetics and parenting argument right out the window.

And you have yet to answer the question.

I can make the argument that raising amoral people is a good thing.
Now there better argument is that raising children who are ethical is what is important. Morals are cr@p and are for sheep who don't have the guts to think for themselves.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 02:29 PM   #94
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
You are the one who stated that college acceptance rates among chinese are impacted by their genetics. By what grounds are you making this assertion? Put up or...
You have made no statement that "good parenting" needs to include "moral values" and who's or which "moral values" are these.
Holy crap, you seriously doubt a well known fact?
Back in the 80's (or was it 90's) the UC system, particularly Berkeley and UCLA instituted quotas... against Asians... because their campus was dominated by Asians. Up to that point, admissions were strongly dictated by academic excellence.
Since then, after public outcry and law suits on racism and prejudice, they've abolished quotas in favor of changes in admission criteria that emphasizes other activities, like leadership, community services, sports, etc., all in the name of a more "rounded" individual.
The top tier university campuses (evidently not your school, if you seriously don't know what I'm talking about) are still strongly dominated by Asians, relative to their population ratios.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
I can make the argument that raising amoral people is a good thing.
Now there better argument is that raising children who are ethical is what is important. Morals are cr@p and are for sheep who don't have the guts to think for themselves.
If you seriously don't see the problem with your statement, and are seriously contemplating raising your kids that way, then I am done discussing with you.
If you do, and just being sarcastic, then you're trolling and I'm also done with you.

Last edited by Master Po; 01-18-2011 at 02:59 PM.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 02:49 PM   #95
'busa
Registered User
 
'busa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 1,465
My Ride: E90 335i (sold)
We're not talking about genitalia anymore?
__________________
'busa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 07:37 PM   #96
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
Holy crap, you seriously doubt a well known fact?
Back in the 80's (or was it 90's) the UC system, particularly Berkeley and UCLA instituted quotas... against Asians... because their campus was dominated by Asians. Up to that point, admissions were strongly dictated by academic excellence.
Since then, after public outcry and law suits on racism and prejudice, they've abolished quotas in favor of changes in admission criteria that emphasizes other activities, like leadership, community services, sports, etc., all in the name of a more "rounded" individual.
The top tier university campuses (evidently not your school, if you seriously don't know what I'm talking about) are still strongly dominated by Asians, relative to their population ratios.
Actually Po, I attended to UC Irvine in the early 80's. The UC system had any number of tweaks starting as early as the 1960s to create a breadth in their student body. And the quotas lasted about as long as the attention span of a 6 year old with ADD. The fact that you seem to about other activities, like leadership, community services, sports, the arts, just shows how much you buy in to a particular view and are not interested in breadth of knowledge or experience. What the UC system found was that they had a loophole some people where exploiting. There were people (not just asians) who were focusing on only GPA in specific courses required for entrance and SAT scores. That does not lend itself to fostering a university environment that prided itself on breadth and a well-rounded education, before diving down into a specific major.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
If you seriously don't see the problem with your statement, and are seriously contemplating raising your kids that way, then I am done discussing with you.
If you do, and just being sarcastic, then you're trolling and I'm also done with you.
When the going gets tough, the tough go and in the corner.

What is the benefit of morality? It is merely a social construct used to prohibit free thought. It has been for millennia.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 07:39 PM   #97
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by hayabusa55 View Post
We're not talking about genitalia anymore?
As soon as Po is confronted with having to put up evidence to support is absurd genetics claims, he ignores the subject. My...what a surprise.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 10:15 PM   #98
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
^^
UC Irvine was never ranked high enough in my field, but you're definitely giving it a bad rap with your sophomoric nonsense.
Did you learn that morals don't matter from UC Irvine?
Did you know that at Caltech, students are required to abide by a higher morals credo, and they can and will get expelled by as cheating? You wouldn't know.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 11:03 PM   #99
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Po View Post
^^
UC Irvine was never ranked high enough in my field, but you're definitely giving it a bad rap with your sophomoric nonsense.
Did you learn that morals don't matter from UC Irvine?
Did you know that at Caltech, students are required to abide by a higher morals credo, and they can and will get expelled by as cheating? You wouldn't know.
Your "field" certainly isn't medicine, law, business, physics, bio, linguistics, or performance arts (including music).
Different schools are "better" than others in certain areas. Your point would be?

Did you know that at caltech it isn't higher morals, its higher ethics.

It seems the school that was ranked high in "your field" neglected to teach you the difference.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Last edited by rdsesq; 01-18-2011 at 11:04 PM.
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2011, 11:27 PM   #100
Master Po
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 363
My Ride: E46 no more
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
I cited old "studies" to show that your claim of one race somehow being inherently superior to another is an ancient claim that people have been trying to jusify for centuries. To claim that one race is inherently superior to another is a racist argument. Plain and simple. If you can find some real science that supports the idea that one race is inherently superior to another, I'd like to see it.

Maybe you need to go back and read some?
Somehow I missed this post.
Start here. Plenty of citations for you to follow up on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
Quote:
The connection between race and intelligence has been a subject of debate in both popular science and academic research since the inception of intelligence testing in the early 20th century, particularly in the United States. Intelligence quotient (IQ) tests performed in the US have consistently demonstrated a significant degree of variation between different racial groups, with the average score of the African American population being significantly lower—and that of the Asian American population being higher—than that of the White American population.
Master Po is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use