Look Semen-al it's all very well and good quoting bollox as long as you have an interesting bent on it. If superiority was simply based on the weight of something yo mama would have devised the theory of relativity.
Let me know if in chapter 5 the Aborigines are purported to be a sub-human species.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Thap: *
Look Semen-al it's all very well and good quoting bollox as long as you have an interesting bent on it. If superiority was simply based on the weight of something yo mama would have devised the theory of relativity.
Let me know if in chapter 5 the Aborigines are purported to be a sub-human species.
[/QUOTE]
LOL! Of course they are you idiot, they are the missing link. Haven't you seen the way their knuckles scrape the ground when they shuffle by in their grass skirts?
Of course there are minor differences in races, that's why their called races. Enough of this philosophical mumbo-jumbo though... can we PLEASE get back to the real purpose of the WA forum and post more anti-american rantings?
Thanks and regards
Don't put too much emphasis on the weight of the brain - the size of the penis is also a part of this theory. Also, blacks have narrower hips, wider shoulders, less body fat, and more muscle on average. The genetic phyical differences are undeniable.
Why can't there be genetic differences between the races outside of skin color, lip size and the curliness of one's hair? After all, human genes are 98% similar to chimpanzees and there are a few noticeable differences that wouldn't give you the label of 'nazi' by mentioning.
Re: Superiority of white over brown, yellow, black?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
Why is it that nations with predominantly white population have a better standard of life?
[/QUOTE]
I would suggest that the standard of life is better in predominantly white population nations simply because over the last several centuries the focus of these societies has been on creating stable governmental, educational, and economic systems and institutions that have as their primary objective bettering their people's standard of life.
It is not the whiteness of the population that made the standard of life better. It is the history of stability in governmental, educational, and economic systems and institutions and the objective of bettering the standard of life. There is nothing inherently or genetically superior in whites that enabled them to develop this history and pursue this objective.
"Of course there are minor differences in races, that's why their called races. Enough of this philosophical mumbo-jumbo though... can we PLEASE get back to the real purpose of the WA forum and post more anti-american rantings?
Thank You!
The voice of reason.....
myvoice, your explanation makes far more sense than the genetic makeup theory, but is far less controversial and therefore not as much fun. If we can't have an America-bashing thread, I feel it is important to stir everyone up in some other manner. After all, when have facts been the basis for most threads anyway?
I DID say that genetic superiority is not the reason for white’s better standard of life. However, I DID NOT state or mean to imply that whites are not, in fact, genetically superior. 
Hope that brings the controversy and fun back to this thread. 
The epitome of white man being the ginger variety I think this all falls flat on its puffy face.
Don't care what anyone says, ginners are just plain wrong.
so seminole you’re saying that the avg white skinned joe would have a bigger brain than the black skinned joe? 
^ why is that any different than saying the average white skinned Joe is shorter than the average black skinned Joe, but taller than the average yellow skinned Joe (if there is one)?
Stu, the brain is exempt from possible genetic differences between the races. Skin color, penis size, muscle mass, height, hips, lips, hair density and jumping skills are all possible genetic differences. But to suggest brain size can fall in that category is at best racist, and probably indicates you have a copy of Mein Kampf hidden under your mattress.
^ Actually it's not racist..it is pretty stupid. For the reasons mentioned throughout the thread.
so seminole, is it true?
Sorry Matsui, I missed those reasons. No one has given any reason why it's stupid to say brain sizes vary between races. I would think there is empircal evidence to prove it one way or the other. But brain size may or may not have anything to do with intelligence capability anyway, so whats the big hangup?
2 questions remain unanswered: if numerous physical differences exist between the races, why is it so far fetched to think there could be differences in another part of the body - the brain? And what are the reasons for the absence of an advanced black African civilization throughout history?
Brain sizes? You do realise that is one of the fundamental justifications the Europeans used to enslave the Blacks … their brain size as well as their ‘tough’ body type of having muscles, being stronger (as I believe Seminole pointed out) as further justification to have Blacks enslaved cause their bodies could handle hard labour and therefore, it was acceptable to use them as slaves. 
It is complete garbage!!
The reason why blacks have “lagged” is cause they’ve been enslaved since the 1400s. It’s only in the last century they were given more equality.
I think Matsui stated that the reason why the countries with predominantly white people have advanced is because there is more political and economic cooperation between them. You must note that these “white” countries are not really white! Like America for example … it has a rich and ethnically diverse country where all races contribute to the country’s success.
That was a stupid, wasn’t it?
maybe because the size of the brain does not depend on genes. If that was the case, there would be NO black scientist or inventor. What makes the difference is that how much you use your brain and the hard work you put in. If intellect were to somehow magically run in the genes then we would have had generations of exteremly smart people from the same family.
What kind of balloney is it anyways that just because you have black skin your brain size is less? Repeat it to yourself a few times and you’ll discover the rabid stupidity of this statement.
On a side note; if lets say a fair skinned person gets a tan, would his brain shrink?
So Seminole my friend, put your white hood and robe away and embrace enlightenment. 
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
That was a stupid, wasn't it?
[/QUOTE]
If anything, the argument about black peoples' build, brain size and genitals is absolutely racist. There are plenty of sources out there that document the horrific experiments that were carried out by Europeans on Black men and women where they came to these racist and completely ridiculous conclusions.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Sorry Matsui, I missed those reasons. No one has given any reason why it's stupid to say brain sizes vary between races. I would think there is empircal evidence to prove it one way or the other. But brain size may or may not have anything to do with intelligence capability anyway, so whats the big hangup?
2 questions remain unanswered: if numerous physical differences exist between the races, why is it so far fetched to think there could be differences in another part of the body - the brain? And what are the reasons for the absence of an advanced black African civilization throughout history?
[/QUOTE]
Semi, I am not debunking that brain size, physical traits, can be racially different. I am debunking the bunk of capabilities, be it physical virtues of citia, altia, fortia or intellectual superiority of one race over the other. We are on the same page.