Evaluation of humans as another chimp species.
Rushtown
man?
Because they would be free from ideological considerations they would
find that Asians were the most intelligent, but not aggressive. Caucasoids
would be evaluated as almost as smart as Asians and much more
aggressive. (leading to higher levels of innovation.)
Negroids would be evaluated a subspecies of the human - chimp species
most different from the others being less intelligent but physically stronger.
(now remember this is the non-PC opinion of LGM and does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of this poster.)
John Freck
If they used English they would have used species in a way that is
beyond our understand of species. We would ask them why they grouped as
a species with the chimp and why not the gorilla and orangatang too? We
call this group the and the monkeys too the primates, monkeys are
primates too?
It wouldn't be a be deal. We would just ask them why they used the
usage of [species] in place of animal family? Someday we might see the
animal family as a key to evolutionary stategies. Chimps are carring on
alot of genes that we have too.
John
John Freck
> How would space aliens evaluated the various sub-species (ie races) of
> man?
> Because they would be free from ideological considerations they would
> find that Asians were the most intelligent, but not aggressive. Caucasoids
> would be evaluated as almost as smart as Asians and much more
> aggressive. (leading to higher levels of innovation.)
> Negroids would be evaluated a subspecies of the human - chimp species
> most different from the others being less intelligent but physically stronger.
> (now remember this is the non-PC opinion of LGM and does not necessarily
> reflect the opinion of this poster.)
If they used English they would have used [species] in a way that is
beyond our understanding of [species] as a word. The aliens would be
set with some answers that they expect. We would ask them why they
grouped as a species with the chimp and why not the gorilla and
orangatang too? We call this group the and the monkeys too the
primates, monkeys are primates too?
It wouldn't be a big deal. We would just ask them why they used the
Graham Broad
<rush...@aol.com> wrote:
> How would space aliens evaluated the various sub-species (ie races) of
> man?
> Because they would be free from ideological considerations they would
> find that Asians were the most intelligent, but not aggressive. Caucasoids
> would be evaluated as almost as smart as Asians and much more
> aggressive. (leading to higher levels of innovation.)
> Negroids would be evaluated a subspecies of the human - chimp species
> most different from the others being less intelligent but physically stronger.
> (now remember this is the non-PC opinion of LGM and does not necessarily
> reflect the opinion of this poster.)
You know what, Rushton? You just made my killfile. Why don't you at
least have the intellectual integrity to at least tell the others what
it is that you actually believe on this topic rather than being coy
about posing these questions and then running for cover?
Vegard Valberg
>
> snip racist drivel
You know if space aliens did come down here I think that not only would
they be unable to seperate the various races of humanity, they would
also be unable to see the difference between humans and other primates
(or as Hobbes said "I know I can't see a difference" : )).
Now buzz off you little troll.
--
- Vegard Valberg
My e-mail adress is <vval...@online.no>,
that is two v's, not one W.
Rushtown
>From: Graham Broad gbr...@home.com
>Date: 2/1/00 6:26 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <010220000929190769%gbr...@home.com>
See my other reply in this NG. That convincing argument may me believe that
all the races are absolutely equal and congruent. In fact there is no such
thing as race.
It was very foolish for me to try and spark a debate on this nonsensical
subject. My only explanation is I saw an interview with
Mr. Entine about his recent book "Taboo" where the interviewer gave the
possibility of racial differences in performance a respectful airing.
But this giddy hysteria has passed. And I now agree that this is a subject too
ridiculous for serious debate. You will never hear me discuss it again, I
promise.
El Damero
"Rushtown" <rush...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000201022037...@ng-cc1.aol.com...
Graham Broad
<ji...@sme.com.au> wrote:
> >You know what, Rushton? You just made my killfile. Why don't you at
> >least have the intellectual integrity to at least tell the others what
> >it is that you actually believe on this topic rather than being coy
> >about posing these questions and then running for cover?
>
> Actually, I think Rushton posed a reasonable question. If you can't discuss
> things in a newsgroup without PC thought police trying to stifle debate (as
> happens in the academic world), then where can you?
Oh, and another thing while we're at it. The fact that I killfiled the
guy in no way makes me part of the so-called "PC Thought Police". It
means I don't want to read his bullshit anymore. I'm not surpressing
his right to post it. I'm not "stifling debate" as you suggest. I'm
saying that I don't want to be part of the debate. The difference is
crucial.
GB
Graham Broad
> >You know what, Rushton? You just made my killfile. Why don't you at
> >least have the intellectual integrity to at least tell the others what
> >it is that you actually believe on this topic rather than being coy
> >about posing these questions and then running for cover?
>
> Actually, I think Rushton posed a reasonable question. If you can't discuss
> things in a newsgroup without PC thought police trying to stifle debate (as
> happens in the academic world), then where can you?
>
> Jim Penman
I'm not talking about "PC thought police". I'm talking about a guy
being a complete asshole. "Rushtown" posts these questions and runs for
it, and doesn't have the intellectual honesty to admit that he's a fan
of one J.P. Rushton, a psychologist from the University of Western
Ontario who has a theory that blacks are less intelligent than whites
are less intelligent than Asians on the basis of their genetic
material. Rushton is universally hated in his own department. Everyone
there thinks he's a quack, and understands that his research is used
for one purpose only: it is used for racist purposes, because it's of
no conceivable value anywhere else.
One of the things that I can't stand about people like Rushtown and an
assortment of Holocaust deniers who post here from time to time is that
they don't have the integrity to just come out and say what they mean -
to admit that they hate blacks and Jews - instead they're coy about it
and claim to be "just curious" or doing it all in the interest of
historical or scientific accuracy, when the rest of their behavior
reveals very clearly that they are interested in neither of those
things.
Just for the record, I work in the same building as Rushton and I have
signed petitions to support his right to conduct research on his quack
theories.
GB
Dave Murphy
>> Actually, I think Rushton posed a reasonable question. If you can't discuss
>> things in a newsgroup without PC thought police trying to stifle debate (as
>> happens in the academic world), then where can you?
>
>guy in no way makes me part of the so-called "PC Thought Police". It
>means I don't want to read his bullshit anymore. I'm not surpressing
>his right to post it. I'm not "stifling debate" as you suggest. I'm
>saying that I don't want to be part of the debate. The difference is
>crucial.
Well put.
dave
>GB
Remove MAPSON to reply
Rushtown
>Message-id: <030220000847205004%gbr...@home.com>
>
>In article <94956952...@proxy.teksupport.net.au>,
><ji...@sme.com.au> wrote:
>
>> >You know what, Rushton? You just made my killfile. Why don't you at
>> >least have the intellectual integrity to at least tell the others what
>> >it is that you actually believe on this topic rather than being coy
>> >about posing these questions and then running for cover?
>>
I'm Rushtown not Rushton. Yes, I admire
Rushton. His theory clarifies mankind's recent evolution and is very important
apart from anything it says about IQ. It is far from nonsense and is supported
by much more evidence than can be arrayed against it.
I don't hate Jews, I admire most of them.
One of my kids in named "Benjamin."
I don't deny the Holocaust---the evidence is
overwhelming.
I'm a registered Democrat.
My main motivation is seeing obvious truths (such as Blacks have a genetic
advantage in the 100 m dash) be decried
as racist myths and legitimate researchers
who sincerely believe in their conclusions
being portrayed as Nazis.
I'm going to opt out of the race-IQ debate.
I thought that in the semi-anonymous enviornment of USENET I could have an
interesting discussion.
But the replys are usually in the nature of
"Why don't you fuck off" or "You're the racist piece of garbage that said J
Philippe
Rushton was intelligent; don't you know everyone calls him a racist."
ji...@sme.com.au
(don't let the bastards grind you down)
Jim Penman