Even Monkey Lady Jane Goodall Doesn't Like Bush
jack...@email.msn.com
_________
Primate expert blasts Bush
WHITE HOUSE POLICY BAD FOR APES, SHE SAYS
By Frank Sweeney
Mercury News
The biggest threat to chimpanzees, the African apes that are the
closest relative of the human species, may be hunters seeking bush
meat,
______
COMMENT: Bush meat ... BWAHAHA! Ahem, carry-on
________
renowned primatologist Jane Goodall told a Silicon Valley audience
Saturday. But in the past three years, she said, another threat to
endangered animals around the world has emerged -- the Bush
administration.
Goodall, famed for her research with chimpanzees in Tanzania since
1960, was harshly critical of President Bush's environmental record
while delivering the keynote speech at the second annual Wildlife
Conservation Expo at Foothill College in Los Altos Hills.
``What the Bush administration has done over the past three years to
overturn environmental laws is unbelievable. It's shameful. We must
not sit still and do nothing,'' she said.
(SNIP)
______
Solution: Bring the primates to America and enter them in college
under the affirmative action programs. One day, Magilla Gorilla will
be doing your heart surgery.
BroJack
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local
/states/california/northern_california/6996221.htm
Oldrivel
jack...@email.msn.com (broj...@my-deja.com) writes:
My psychic ability tells me jacweso brojack is a somewhat mentally impaired
white male, aprox 55 years of age. As an after thought, are there any real
Indians on
this very unusual forum?
MIB529
BTW, love your new M$N addy. Now I can make fun of you for having a luser domain.
jack...@email.msn.com (broj...@my-deja.com) wrote in message news:<7cebf3d2.03101...@posting.google.com>...
Tommy
> What else can we blame on Bush?
We can blame him for sending White Gentiles to die for Isreal.
L@@K at all this neoscum/Neocons.
As you can see - These same neoscum that are running the Bush admin had this
war plan already drew up for a greater Isreal
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1047
1). Richard Perle----One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he is the
chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli
government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in
the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing
Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He
later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle is one of the
leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the
administration and now in the media.
2). Paul Wolfowitz----Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's
Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of
Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister
lives in Israel. Wolfowitz is the number two leader within the
administration behind this Iraq war mongering.
3). Douglas Feith----Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the
Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special
Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who
has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with
the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even
attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently
speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell,
which only has one
International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is
representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his
appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith
basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith, like Perle and
Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.
4). Edward Luttwak----Member of the National Security Study Group of the
Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli
citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and
pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose
main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war
against Iraq.
5). Henry Kissinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about
Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book (Price of Power:
Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger had a part in the Watergate
crimes,
Southeast Asia mass murders, Chile dictatorship, and more recently served as
Serbian Dictator Slobodan Milosevic's Advisor. He consistently advocates
going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S.
6). Dov Zakheim----Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief
Financial Officer (CFO) for the Department of Defense. He is an ordained
rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended attended
Jew's College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in
1973. He was adjunct professor at New York's Jewish Yeshiva University.
Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.
7). Kenneth Adelman-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on
the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist
pro-Israel advisor, who supports going to war against Iraq. Adelman
frequently is a guest on Fox News, and often expresses extremist and often
ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. Through his hatred or stupidity,
he actually called Arabs "anti-Semitic" on Fox News (11/28/2001), when he
could have looked it up in the dictionary to find out that Arabs by
definition are Semites.
8). I. Lewis Libby -----Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. The
chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is
so gun-ho to invade Iraq. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby
was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Mark Rich, whom
Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president.
9). Robert Satloff----U.S. National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was
the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington
Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come
from this front group, like Martin Indyk.
10). Elliott Abrams-----National Security Council Advisor. He previously
worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center.
During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of
State,handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an
important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling
U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels
fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively
deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby
faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to
two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of
community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted
Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the
Reagan Administration's State Department.
11). Marc Grossman-----Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He
was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources
at the Department of State. Grossman is one of many of the pro-Israel
Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to
higher posts.
12). Richard Haass-----Director of Policy Planning at the State Department
and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security Programs
and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of
the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who
sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently advocates going
to war against Iraq. Haass is also a member of the Defense Department's
National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.
13). Robert Zoellick-----U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level
position.He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr)
Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the
country in order to set up setting up a Vichy-style puppet government. He
consistently advocates going to war against Iraq.
14). Ari Fleischer----Official White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr)
Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that
he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the
extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the
Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer
was the co-president of Chabad's Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the
Young
Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.
15). James Schlesinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger also
sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another
extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supports going to war against Iraq.
Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department's National
Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.
16). Mel Sembler-----President of the Export-Import Bank of the United
States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman
of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates
trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries,
specifically those with financial problems.
17). Michael Chertoff ----Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal
Division, at the Justice Department.
18). Joshua Bolten----Bush's Chief Policy Director, banker and former
legislative aide. Prominent in the Jewish community.
19). Steve Goldsmith----Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush's Jewish
domestic policy advisor. He also serves as liaison in the White House
Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within
the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of
Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert
and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.
20). Adam Goldman-----White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.
21). Joseph Gildenhorn-----Bush Campaign's Special Liaison to the Jewish
Community. He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as
campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.
22). Christopher Gersten-----Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Administration for Children and Families at HHS. Gersten was the former
Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Husband of Labor
Secretary, Linda Chavez, and reportedly very pro-Israel. Their children are
being raised Jewish.
23). Mark Weinberger-----Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Policy.
24). Samuel Bodman-----Deputy Secretary of Commerce. He was the Chairman and
CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.
25). Bonnie Cohen-----Under Secretary of State for Management.
26). Ruth Davis-----Director of Foreign Service Institute, who reports to
the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible
for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).
27). Lincoln Bloomfield-----Assistant Secretary of State for Political
Military Affairs.
28). Jay Lefkowitz-----General Counsel of the Office of Budget and
Management.
29). David Frum-----White House speechwriter.
30). Ken Melman-----White House Political Director.
31). Brad Blakeman------White House Director of Scheduling.
32). Colin Powell-----Secretary of State, ex-chairman of Joint Chiefs of
Staff, of Jamaican origin, he has one Jewish ancestor on his father's side.
He grew up in a heavily Jewish-populated neighborhood in New York, and
speaks Yiddish. The first day of being picked (12/16/2000) he said he
wanted to toughen sanctions on Iraq, and will work to "re-energize the
sanctions regime," even though he knows the embargo has killed 2 million
Iraqi civilians.
Now that Bush has hired these pro-Israel Jewish lobbyists to the highest
positions in the land, they have escalated the fanatical war-mongering
against Iraq, all the while they support the Israeli war-criminal Sharon in
his terrorism and mass-killings of Palestinian civilians. It seems that the
price of the acheiving the White House involves selling out to the Israeli
lobby, much like Clinton, before him.
There are some hopeful signs coming out of the adminstration, however.
Despite this strong pro-Israeli presence within the administration, it
seems that Bush has not yet jumped on their band-wagon, and instead is
listening to the sensible leaders and advisors, like the Pentagon's
military brass, the U.S. intelligence community, other groups within the
federal government, as well as from America's friends and allies around the
world. No one wants this
war except Israel, its agents, and its lobbies around the world.
The question that remains unanswered is, will the Israeli lobby use (or
create) some scandal to blackmail Bush into attacking Iraq, like they used
Monica Lewinsky against Clinton to force him to launch "Operation Desert
Fox," in December 1998? Watch how many of the media outlets and some
politicians are blaming Bush for the all the corporate scandals and the
huge recession the U.S. is going through.
What Bush needs to do is use some common sense, and have some courage to
stand up to these pro-Israel bullies, and act in the best interests of
America, and not Israel. The first act for Bush should be to replace these
pro-Israeli fanatics with patriotic Americans.
Dave Simpson
Dave Simpson
Erik A. Mattila
This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
statistics which he calls "discussion".
Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
debate and pointing out his idiocy. Knowing the truth, I truly pity him. It'
s no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
welcome to do so.
Perfesser White
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
> EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
> to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
> statistics which he calls "discussion".
BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
bigoted?
>
> Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
> that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
> him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
He did?
>
> For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
> debate and pointing out his idiocy. Knowing the truth, I truly pity him. It'
> s no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
>
> Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
> welcome to do so.
In other words, facts are not on your side. I'd quit too if I were you.
Perfesser White
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Erik A. Mattila
Tommy wrote:
> broj...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>What else can we blame on Bush?
>
>
>
> We can blame him for sending White Gentiles to die for Isreal.
>
> L@@K at all this neoscum/Neocons.
>
> As you can see - These same neoscum that are running the Bush admin had this
> war plan already drew up for a greater Isreal
> http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1047
Great list, Tommy. I copied it and saved it in my "PNAC" folder.
Thanks - there's a few in there that I didn't know about.
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
Dave Simpson wrote:
> Why are academics so disconnected from reality and addicted to play-pen leftism?
>
>
> Dave Simpson
No great mystery about that, Dave. When one begins to actually employ
intelligence, the neurotic underpinings of rightism become completely
opaque. Better a play-pen than a loony-bin. (Which also explains why
political conservatives feel so threatened by academia.)
eam
John Hart
"Perfesser White" <prof....@whiteuniversity.org> wrote in message
news:prof.white-18068...@cosmos.uncensored-news.com...
You did! PLONK!
Erik A. Mattila
Perfesser White wrote:
> In article <3F8B01D...@oco.net>,
> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>
>
>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
>
>
> BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
> bigoted?
Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
>>Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
>>that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
>>him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
>
>
> He did?
Are you saying Lane doesn't have it right?
>>For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
>>debate and pointing out his idiocy. Knowing the truth, I truly pity him. It'
>>s no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
>>
>>Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
>>welcome to do so.
>
>
> In other words, facts are not on your side. I'd quit too if I were you.
> Perfesser White
"Facts" are not even in the pot, my friend. This clown insists that
Chavis was shot in a drug deal, for instance. That's just plain lying -
doesn't even qualify as a factoid. So you need to stop fantasizing about
these so-called "facts," even though they may prop up your own agenda.
eam
Gringo
>My psychic ability tells me jacweso brojack is a somewhat mentally impaired
>white male, aprox 55 years of age. As an after thought, are there any real
>Indians on
>this very unusual forum?
At UC Berkeley I was once manager and chief engineer of the campus
radio station, KALX. At one point the station naturally ended up in
conflict with radical Afro-Americans who wanted more air time and were
promoting violence on the air. back then. The group would get into
loud arguments with the Daily Californian staff next door when they
didn't get their way. It was almost scary for little suburban white
me.
One day at hallway elevators I ran into Frank Jenkins, an aggressive
loud leader in the Black Student Union. The guy had an arrest record
and was always in trouble with the UC administration, so I was wary
about talking with him, especially since he knew I was in charge of a
campus media organization.
He started a conversation out of the blue by walking up and saying
"You Black!". He said he knew a Black person when he saw one. He went
on and on asking me about my past which I openly told him. When I said
I was born in Little Rock, AR, he said that explained it. But I have a
family tree with white people on it. It was an odd conversation, but
underneath it was flattering that a Black radical would come out and
say that.
The nice thing is that while the BSU hassled the campus newspaper,
they didn't bother me nor the radio station. Frank Jenkins was always
friendly and said hi in the hallway even though I had nothing to do
with him, his causes, nor Black issues.
But the point is that Frank Jenkins insisted he could tell Black blood
when he saw it - a racial psychic radar he claimed to have - and
seemed to get his wires crossed. So when I see you hawking psychic
racial abilities, I think about Frank Jenkins.
Tommy
>
>
> Tommy wrote:
>> broj...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What else can we blame on Bush?
>>
>>
>>
>> We can blame him for sending White Gentiles to die for Isreal.
>>
>> L@@K at all this neoscum/Neocons.
>>
>> As you can see - These same neoscum that are running the Bush admin had
>> this war plan already drew up for a greater Isreal
>> http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1047
>
> Great list, Tommy. I copied it and saved it in my "PNAC" folder.
> Thanks - there's a few in there that I didn't know about.
>
> Erik
If you want more on this go to www. no war for israel dot com. My ISP will
not alow me to post the URL..go figure.
Oldrivel
<gringo...@firetrick.net> writes:
>But the point is that Frank Jenkins insisted he could tell Black blood
>when he saw it - a racial psychic radar he claimed to have - and
>seemed to get his wires crossed. So when I see you hawking psychic
>racial abilities, I think about Frank Jenkins.
>
My unique psychic abilities tell me you are a white person who shows an
interest in
Indian culture, possibly by attending pow wows. Your many admirable qualities
include an open honesty which reveals to all who you really are. In my opinion,
open honesty is a very admirable attribute. Gringo, have a nice day.
Gringo
>My unique psychic abilities tell me you are a white person who shows an
>interest in
>Indian culture, possibly by attending pow wows. Your many admirable qualities
>include an open honesty which reveals to all who you really are. In my opinion,
>open honesty is a very admirable attribute. Gringo, have a nice day.
This seems true, and I've attended pow wows. But that's not how I came
to take an interest in Indian cultures - more a result.
It will stretch your psychic powers to the max, but can you reveal
through your psychic powers why I took that interest?
Erik A. Mattila
>>>We can blame him for sending White Gentiles to die for Isreal.
>>>
>>>L@@K at all this neoscum/Neocons.
>>>
>>>As you can see - These same neoscum that are running the Bush admin had
>>>this war plan already drew up for a greater Isreal
>>>http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1047
>>
>>Great list, Tommy. I copied it and saved it in my "PNAC" folder.
>>Thanks - there's a few in there that I didn't know about.
>>
>>Erik
>
> If you want more on this go to www. no war for israel dot com. My ISP will
> not alow me to post the URL..go figure.
>
Interesting. Thanks again. I have to confess, though, that I get a
little queasy aiming this critiqe at generic "Israel" and/or "Jews." I
feel better with "Likudniks" or something like that. It just occludes a
large number of Jews and Israelis who don't go along with the neocon agenda.
One early victim of Neocon assaults was Edward Said, who passed away
about 10 days ago. It's sad, Said was a clear voice of reason in an
otherwise miserable situation. There's some interesting stuff on the
Said web site concerning Justin Weiner's attack, if you're interested:
http://www.edwardsaid.org/debunking.html
I mean it's really outrageous...like Dennis Miller's spin that there's
no such thing as a Palestinian.
Erik
MIB529
But he was never good at gorilla warfare.
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message news:<3F8B01D...@oco.net>...
Lane Baldwin
"broj...@my-deja.com" <jack...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:7cebf3d2.03101...@posting.google.com...
<snip racist drivel>
This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
statistics which he calls "discussion".
Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
that is almost impossible in this day and age. Knowing the truth, I truly
pity him. It's no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
debate and pointing out his idiocy.
Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
welcome to do so. LB
P.S. - Don't forget to trim the headers when he starts crossposting!!
--
Lane
Starbucks Ends Dispute
www.haidabuckscafe.com
And WE WON!!!
Perfesser White
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8B01D...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
> >>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
> >>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
> >>statistics which he calls "discussion".
> >
> >
> > BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
> > bigoted?
>
> Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
> But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
> opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
politial spin.
>
> >>Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
> >>that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
> >>him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
> >
> >
> > He did?
>
> Are you saying Lane doesn't have it right?
No, I haven't seen BroJack's admission that he was canned from federal
service.
>
> >>For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
> >>debate and pointing out his idiocy. Knowing the truth, I truly pity him.
> >>It'
> >>s no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
> >>
> >>Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
> >>welcome to do so.
> >
> >
> > In other words, facts are not on your side. I'd quit too if I were you.
> > Perfesser White
>
> "Facts" are not even in the pot, my friend. This clown insists that
> Chavis was shot in a drug deal, for instance. That's just plain lying -
> doesn't even qualify as a factoid. So you need to stop fantasizing about
> these so-called "facts," even though they may prop up your own agenda.
>
> eam
He and I both oppose Affirmative Action programs, and that's what his
comment was about in this thread.
Perfesser White
Erik A. Mattila
> In article <3F8B0F7...@oco.net>,
> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Perfesser White wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3F8B01D...@oco.net>,
>>> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
>>>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
>>>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
>>>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
>>>
>>>
>>>BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
>>>bigoted?
>>
>>Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
>>But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
>>opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
>
>
> I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
> politial spin.
You're mistaken. "The Bell Curve" is political spin posing as science.
Why would the Bradley Foundation pay a hack at the American
Enterprise Institute 90K a year to write "science?"
http://www.mediatransparency.org/tft/bell_curve.htm
>
>
>>>>Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
>>>>that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
>>>>him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
>>>
>>>
>>>He did?
>>
>>Are you saying Lane doesn't have it right?
>
>
> No, I haven't seen BroJack's admission that he was canned from federal
> service.
>
>
>>>>For this reason, I will no longer take the easy road by engaging him in
>>>>debate and pointing out his idiocy. Knowing the truth, I truly pity him.
>>>>It'
>>>>s no wonder he is so bitter. How can he live with the shame??
>>>>
>>>>Any person wishing to use this post as a rebuttal to Jack's ravings is
>>>>welcome to do so.
>>>
>>>
>>>In other words, facts are not on your side. I'd quit too if I were you.
>>>Perfesser White
>>
>>"Facts" are not even in the pot, my friend. This clown insists that
>>Chavis was shot in a drug deal, for instance. That's just plain lying -
>>doesn't even qualify as a factoid. So you need to stop fantasizing about
>>these so-called "facts," even though they may prop up your own agenda.
>>
>>eam
>
>
> He and I both oppose Affirmative Action programs, and that's what his
> comment was about in this thread.
> Perfesser White
Wrongo. He was attempting to "prove" AA was no good. He failed, he
lied, he cheated...you know, stuff like that.
eam
Lane Baldwin
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
news:3F8BE776...@oco.net...
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8B0F7...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
Hey, Erik. just a thought....and one I *forgot* last night when I post my
responses to BroJack.
We really should trim the groups so we're not cross-posting and bringing in
the loons...
All the best!
brojack
<emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>>>Recently, BroJack admitted that he was canned from federal service.a feat
>>>that is almost impossible in this day and age. For that reason, I now pity
>>>him, and understand more clearly why he is so bitter.
>> He did?
>Are you saying Lane doesn't have it right?
To put it into words that would be meaningful to you: Lane speaks with
a severely forked tongue.
BroJack
MIB529
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8B0F7...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Perfesser White wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <3F8B01D...@oco.net>,
> >>> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
> >>>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
> >>>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
> >>>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
> >>>bigoted?
> >>
> >>Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
> >>But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
> >>opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
> >
> >
> > I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
> > politial spin.
>
> You're mistaken. "The Bell Curve" is political spin posing as science.
> Why would the Bradley Foundation pay a hack at the American
> Enterprise Institute 90K a year to write "science?"
>
> http://www.mediatransparency.org/tft/bell_curve.htm
You should see TBC's sources. The funniest one was J Phillippe
Rushton: PENIS size and intelligence! LOL! Doesn't tell us much about
human evolution, but it tells us plenty about ol' Phillippe. ::holds
thumb and second finger an inch apart::
Perfesser White
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8B0F7...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Perfesser White wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <3F8B01D...@oco.net>,
> >>> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
> >>>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup
> >>>>is
> >>>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
> >>>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
> >>>bigoted?
> >>
> >>Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
> >>But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
> >>opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
> >
> >
> > I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
> > politial spin.
>
> You're mistaken. "The Bell Curve" is political spin posing as science.
> Why would the Bradley Foundation pay a hack at the American
> Enterprise Institute 90K a year to write "science?"
>
> http://www.mediatransparency.org/tft/bell_curve.htm
Talk about political spin:
"Of all the examples of Bradley [Foundation] funding of "scholarship"
designed to pave the way for right-wing attacks on progressive programs,
the most notorious, of course, is the book "The Bell Curve: Intelligence
and Class Structure in American Life." "
You say spin, I say spin, yada yada yada. It all comes down to one's
political leanings.
I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
Regards,
Perfesser White
>
> eam
Erik A. Mattila
> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8BE776...@oco.net...
>
>>Perfesser White wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3F8B0F7...@oco.net>,
>>> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>>
>
> Hey, Erik. just a thought....and one I *forgot* last night when I post my
> responses to BroJack.
>
> We really should trim the groups so we're not cross-posting and bringing in
> the loons...
>
> All the best!
Yep, I hear you. I'm sort of lazy about that. Well, just "lazy" not
"sort of." I'll be vigilant.
But then, Precursor White wouldn't have read my reply. It's a conundrum.
Erik
Lane Baldwin
>
> Yep, I hear you. I'm sort of lazy about that. Well, just "lazy" not
> "sort of." I'll be vigilant.
>
> But then, Precursor White wouldn't have read my reply. It's a conundrum.
>
This is true. However, trimming means we get rid of those nuts quicker...
--
Lane
Starbucks Ends Dispute
www.haidabuckscafe.com
And WE WON!!!
> Erik
>
>
Oldrivel
<gringo...@firetrick.net> writes:
Most assuredly my white friend, I will give it my best shot.
Indian women are the most desirable of all women and you, Gringo, are as
intrigued by their beauty as I am. I know that sounds Freudian in nature, but
that is what my cyber psychic powers are telling me.
Erik A. Mattila
No it doesn't. Science is science, not politics. The critique against
"The Bell Curve" is that it is pseudo-science. The problem here is that
ever since the "New Right" came of age during Reagan, they have made a
concerted and focused effort to salt the mines of science and academia
with counterfeits published in Vanity Press, funded by Olin, Scaife,
Bradley and so on. And each of these "science" works were designed to
provide factoids that supported purely political agendas. Thank our
lucky stars that in our country our peer review process is flexible
enough to address this reprehensible attack on academia, and inform the
public.
> I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
> I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
> Regards,
> Perfesser White
It can't be discriminatory, since it is addressed to protected classes
of human beings. "Discrimination" is a legal concept which evolved out
of Railroad litigation. I think it was Andrew Carnigie whose railroad
charged less shipping fees to Carnigie's subsidiary companies, and Ford
took him to court on the unfair competition and the "common carrier"
laws were developed, and later applied to civil rights litigations.
Like all legal concepts, it is narrowly construed, and any pop-culture
avatar of the concept is remiss when it breaches the restraints of
meaning the law intends. Legally, it is not "discriminatory" because the
legislative intent behind the term "protected class" is a political
classification, not a racial or ethnic classification. Yes, it's a word
game - that's what law is, basically.
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
Lane Baldwin wrote:
> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8C593D...@oco.net...
>
>>Yep, I hear you. I'm sort of lazy about that. Well, just "lazy" not
>>"sort of." I'll be vigilant.
>>
>>But then, Precursor White wouldn't have read my reply. It's a conundrum.
>>
>
>
> This is true. However, trimming means we get rid of those nuts quicker...
Well....ok. But I might just as well shun. Shucks, I was enjoying the
argument. But hell...who was it? John Stuart Mill...something about
the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people.
Shun I shall.
Erik
Gringo
>Most assuredly my white friend, I will give it my best shot.
>Indian women are the most desirable of all women and you, Gringo, are as
>intrigued by their beauty as I am. I know that sounds Freudian in nature, but
>that is what my cyber psychic powers are telling me.
I would pass this off as just a simple "There's always a woman" guess,
but other "cyber psychic" reports seem to be wide ranging, so it may
be what you honestly believe. However, in one way it could be warm.
But it's incomplete. Odds are poor you could get it, at least in this
way. I'll bring it forward in my mind to help the process. Where would
she be? Paint a picture.
Lane Baldwin
<smile>
Erik,
I think you should do what you feel is best. You'll note that in a few
instances, I preceded the "shun" response with a terse comment, so I don't
think there is a hard and fast rule, even within my own mind. Also, it's
obvious there are other opinions on this subject. Heh! I'll still respect
you if you feel the need to point out Doh!Jack's fault "logic".
BroJack
<emat...@oco.net> wrote:
OK, we'll attribute the 15-point IQ gap to your intellectual laziness
rather than genetics.
Does that satisfy ya?
Or should we attribute the gap to your eating lead paint chips?
>> I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
>> I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
>> Regards,
>> Perfesser White
>
>It can't be discriminatory, since it is addressed to protected classes
>of human beings. "Discrimination" is a legal concept which evolved out
>of Railroad litigation. I think it was Andrew Carnigie whose railroad
>charged less shipping fees to Carnigie's subsidiary companies, and Ford
>took him to court on the unfair competition and the "common carrier"
>laws were developed, and later applied to civil rights litigations.
>Like all legal concepts, it is narrowly construed, and any pop-culture
>avatar of the concept is remiss when it breaches the restraints of
>meaning the law intends. Legally, it is not "discriminatory" because the
>legislative intent behind the term "protected class" is a political
>classification, not a racial or ethnic classification. Yes, it's a word
>game - that's what law is, basically.
What a load of horseshit. Of course it's discriminatory. Just ask
the white guy who was rejected for the job/promotion because of his
skin shade or his son who lost out on the spelling award to Eboneesha
who scored 15 points lower.
In the recent, SCOTUS decision even O'Connor hinted at its
unconstitutionality when she mused that it will no longer be necessary
25 years hence.
BroJack
Jack Strong
wrote:
Or you could attribute it to the fact the test was written by whites
for whites so they could think they're smarter than everyone else.
How do you think you'd do on a test written by another culture for
that other culture?
If you're assessed ability to think is similar to what your displayed
ability is here, I'd reckon you didn't do so well on intelligence
tests anyways.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
BroJack
wrote:
Seems to me that a racially-genetic etiology for your lower IQs is
preferable to intellectual laziness which smacks of moral implication.
After all, we don't condemn those with Down's syndrome.
BroJack
Grumpy au Contraire
"Erik A. Mattila" wrote:
>
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8BE776...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >
>
snip
>
> > I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
> > I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
> > Regards,
> > Perfesser White
>
> It can't be discriminatory, since it is addressed to protected classes
> of human beings. "Discrimination" is a legal concept which evolved out
> of Railroad litigation. I think it was Andrew Carnigie whose railroad
> charged less shipping fees to Carnigie's subsidiary companies, and Ford
> took him to court on the unfair competition and the "common carrier"
> laws were developed, and later applied to civil rights litigations.
> Like all legal concepts, it is narrowly construed, and any pop-culture
> avatar of the concept is remiss when it breaches the restraints of
> meaning the law intends. Legally, it is not "discriminatory" because the
> legislative intent behind the term "protected class" is a political
> classification, not a racial or ethnic classification. Yes, it's a word
> game - that's what law is, basically.
>
> Erik
--
JT
Just tooling through cyberspace in my ancient G4
Grumpy au Contraire
"Erik A. Mattila" wrote:
>
> Perfesser White wrote:
> > In article <3F8BE776...@oco.net>,
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
> >
>
snip
>
> > I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
> > I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
> > Regards,
> > Perfesser White
>
> It can't be discriminatory, since it is addressed to protected classes
> of human beings. "Discrimination" is a legal concept which evolved out
> of Railroad litigation. I think it was Andrew Carnigie whose railroad
> charged less shipping fees to Carnigie's subsidiary companies, and Ford
> took him to court on the unfair competition and the "common carrier"
> laws were developed, and later applied to civil rights litigations.
> Like all legal concepts, it is narrowly construed, and any pop-culture
> avatar of the concept is remiss when it breaches the restraints of
> meaning the law intends. Legally, it is not "discriminatory" because the
> legislative intent behind the term "protected class" is a political
> classification, not a racial or ethnic classification. Yes, it's a word
> game - that's what law is, basically.
>
> Erik
Whoa thar' podner... That's really stretchin' a bit heeyah.
Your first sentence is a contradiction in modern terms. Digging up a
long past historical precedent just doesn't count in this age.
But, you did manage to make my points earlier posted...
Grumpy au Contraire
Jack Strong wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:12:43 GMT, Bro...@windswept.net (BroJack)
> wrote:
>
>
snip
> >
> >OK, we'll attribute the 15-point IQ gap to your intellectual laziness
> >rather than genetics.
>
> Or you could attribute it to the fact the test was written by whites
> for whites so they could think they're smarter than everyone else.
> How do you think you'd do on a test written by another culture for
> that other culture?
>
Ah... But that is the point. Do you want to compete in the *real*
world or are you gonna be satisfied with substandard education based on
criteria that you decide on? If you choose the latter, then there is
little hope of participating in the part of life that most Americans enjoy.
Wayne George
Wayne George tsc.sd.
First Nations Artist
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
news:3F8C8003...@oco.net...
Wayne George
Wayne George tsc.sd.
First Nations Artist
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Oldrivel" <oldr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031014174335...@mb-m25.aol.com...
Perfesser White
There are peer reviewed works that support TBC as well. It comes down to
whether or not one acknowledges innate abilities, hence the political
aspects of it.
>
> > I'm late getting into this thread, so I don't BroJack posted previously.
> > I, too, think AA is bad since it is discriminatory.
> > Regards,
> > Perfesser White
>
> It can't be discriminatory, since it is addressed to protected classes
> of human beings. "Discrimination" is a legal concept which evolved out
> of Railroad litigation. I think it was Andrew Carnigie whose railroad
> charged less shipping fees to Carnigie's subsidiary companies, and Ford
> took him to court on the unfair competition and the "common carrier"
> laws were developed, and later applied to civil rights litigations.
> Like all legal concepts, it is narrowly construed, and any pop-culture
> avatar of the concept is remiss when it breaches the restraints of
> meaning the law intends. Legally, it is not "discriminatory" because the
> legislative intent behind the term "protected class" is a political
> classification, not a racial or ethnic classification. Yes, it's a word
> game - that's what law is, basically.
>
> Erik
It is indeed a word game. The net effect of it is that my children and
my yet to be born grandchildren are held to account for the
transgressions of their forefathers, a concept we reject in any other
venue.
Perfesser White
Gringo
<gwge...@uniserve.com> wrote:
>Nd...us Shinobby Men are much sought after as well....
That's great Wayne, but I believe I'll stick to thinking about
beautiful Indian women. Thanks anyway.
Erik A. Mattila
What contradiction? "Protected class" is a poltical class, not a class
of race, gender, ethnicity, national origin etc. There's no
contradiction. The law is clear on this. If Affirmative Action
programs were "discriminatory" all institutions that practiced them
would be in violation of federal and state statues. Obviously that is
not illegal.
As for "long past historical precedents" - well, that's a misstatment.
Were talking about Long past legal precedents. That's the way the law
is constructed, as I'm sure you know. Look up "discrimination" in
Black's Law Dictionary if you have any doubts.
But I can't help citing an example: If it weren't for a long past legal
precedent that decided a man on horseback would take 6 days getting from
Alabama to Washington D.C. (or was it Philadelphia?), Al Gore might be
in the oval office. Remember? It happened just two wars ago in 2000.
Lane Baldwin
"Grumpy au Contraire" <Gru...@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote in message
news:3F8CC2E0...@doofis.FAKEcom...
>
>
>
> Ah... But that is the point. Do you want to compete in the *real*
> world or are you gonna be satisfied with substandard education based on
> criteria that you decide on? If you choose the latter, then there is
> little hope of participating in the part of life that most Americans
enjoy.
>
>
You miss the point. First, an IQ test is an "intelligence quotient"
test...not a test of what someone has already learned. And, yes, there's a
difference. To expect a child who has never seen a saucer to automatically
know that it goes with a cup is unsound. If the child is teachable, you can
later teach them that the saucer goes with the cup.
Does that help?
--
Lane
Starbucks Ends Dispute
www.haidabuckscafe.com
And WE WON!!!
>
Grumpy au Contraire
Lane Baldwin wrote:
>
> "Grumpy au Contraire" <Gru...@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote in message
> news:3F8CC2E0...@doofis.FAKEcom...
> >
> >
> >
> > Ah... But that is the point. Do you want to compete in the *real*
> > world or are you gonna be satisfied with substandard education based on
> > criteria that you decide on? If you choose the latter, then there is
> > little hope of participating in the part of life that most Americans
> enjoy.
> >
> >
>
> You miss the point. First, an IQ test is an "intelligence quotient"
> test...not a test of what someone has already learned. And, yes, there's a
> difference. To expect a child who has never seen a saucer to automatically
> know that it goes with a cup is unsound. If the child is teachable, you can
> later teach them that the saucer goes with the cup.
> Does that help?
> --
>
> Lane
>
Uh, I did not bring IQ, (or related testing), into the discussion.
That's an entirely different point that might make a spirited discussion
in the future.
The "standardized" tests that I refer to are those given after a period
of instruction. They are based on (hopefully) acquired skills to
function in society. They usually come at the end of the academic year
and should require no special preparation other that of good basic instruction.
Just watched another episode of Jaywalking last night and...
Grumpy au Contraire
It's all a matter of interpretation. You have chosen yours and I'll
stick to my analysis. Within the next ten years, all AA
practices/legislation will be struck down. Discrimination is
discrimination anytime that two items are considered equal when indeed
they are different.
> As for "long past historical precedents" - well, that's a misstatment.
> Were talking about Long past legal precedents. That's the way the law
> is constructed, as I'm sure you know. Look up "discrimination" in
> Black's Law Dictionary if you have any doubts.
And times change and often the precedents are outdated, i.e., no longer
practiced. Fact is, I really don't know of any precedents for AA based
on "long time." This was something cooked up beginning during Johnson's
Great Society and the greatest adventure of social engineering in our time.
>
> But I can't help citing an example: If it weren't for a long past legal
> precedent that decided a man on horseback would take 6 days getting from
> Alabama to Washington D.C. (or was it Philadelphia?), Al Gore might be
> in the oval office. Remember? It happened just two wars ago in 2000.
>
>
Forget the 2000 election. What happened was supposed to happen and even
it is not without precedent.
Wayne George
Try being a bit more appreciative of the beauty in all...nd
you will move that much closer to your true self...
Unless you are afraid of self..which most seem to be...
Wayne George tsc.sd.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Gringo" <gringo...@firetrick.net> wrote in message
news:udmpovg0s86p7426l...@4ax.com...
Gringo
<gwge...@uniserve.com> wrote:
>I see your point "G"..but you fail to see mine...
>Try being a bit more appreciative of the beauty in all...nd
>you will move that much closer to your true self...
>Unless you are afraid of self..which most seem to be...
I understood you and your real meaning. I just childishly couldn't
resist some dry humor :^)
Dave Simpson
> > leftism?
> No great mystery about that, Dave. When one begins to actually employ
> intelligence,
they find it not only shocking, but sometimes sick, how '60s
radicalism found its way onto college campuses. It's as though those
people truly do wish to have their ivory tower be a shelter -- from
reality.
You stand corrected and better educated.
Dave Simpson
MIB529
> >> >>>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
> >> >>>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
> >> >>>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
> >> >>>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
> >> >>>bigoted?
> >> >>
> >> >>Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
> >> >>But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
> >> >>opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
> >> > politial spin.
> >>
> >> You're mistaken. "The Bell Curve" is political spin posing as science.
> >> Why would the Bradley Foundation pay a hack at the American
> >> Enterprise Institute 90K a year to write "science?"
> >>
> >> http://www.mediatransparency.org/tft/bell_curve.htm
> >
> >You should see TBC's sources. The funniest one was J Phillippe
> >Rushton: PENIS size and intelligence! LOL! Doesn't tell us much about
> >human evolution, but it tells us plenty about ol' Phillippe. ::holds
> >thumb and second finger an inch apart::
>
> Seems to me that a racially-genetic etiology for your lower IQs is
> preferable to intellectual laziness which smacks of moral implication.
I'd prefer saying that the simple fact that the poor don't have access
to a decent education is preferable to either because it's the truth.
> After all, we don't condemn those with Down's syndrome.
No, but the Pioneer Fund (who funds all these studies) would sterilize
anyone with a low IQ. Besides which, the whole Bell Curve schtick was
bad science from the get-go; they did NOT mention variation within the
'race'. NONE of these eugenists do, because it 'obfuscates heirarchal
order', as Rushton put it. (Translation: They can't get the results
they want unless they fudge their numbers.)
brojack
wrote:
>Bro...@windswept.net (BroJack) wrote in message news:<3f8c959...@news.east.earthlink.net>...
>> >> >>>>This person, Jack Wesolowski(sp?), also known as brojack, brajoke,
>> >> >>>>EbrolaJack, etc., is a racist bigot whose only purpose in this newsgroup is
>> >> >>>>to cause trouble by engaging in infinite gainsaying and the distortion of
>> >> >>>>statistics which he calls "discussion".
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>BroJack discusses facts such as government data. Are facts racist and
>> >> >>>bigoted?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Can be. But you need to distinguish "fact" from "factoid" for starters.
>> >> >>But "data" is meaninless until it is interpreted. Therein lies the
>> >> >>opportunity for racism and bigotry. Consider "The Bell Curve" for example.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I believe The Bell Curve is solid science and has been subjected to
>> >> > politial spin.
>> >>
>> >> You're mistaken. "The Bell Curve" is political spin posing as science.
>> >> Why would the Bradley Foundation pay a hack at the American
>> >> Enterprise Institute 90K a year to write "science?"
>> >>
>> >> http://www.mediatransparency.org/tft/bell_curve.htm
>> >
>> >You should see TBC's sources. The funniest one was J Phillippe
>> >Rushton: PENIS size and intelligence! LOL! Doesn't tell us much about
>> >human evolution, but it tells us plenty about ol' Phillippe. ::holds
>> >thumb and second finger an inch apart::
>>
>> Seems to me that a racially-genetic etiology for your lower IQs is
>> preferable to intellectual laziness which smacks of moral implication.
>
>I'd prefer saying that the simple fact that the poor don't have access
>to a decent education is preferable to either because it's the truth.
This table lists a wide variety of studies into IQ. They're ranked by
IQ, lowest on top. Note (based on order) that the North Dakota IQ
scores are 112, which, being predominantly rural and white, has
approximately the same low economic status as is typically used to
explain the low black scores. Not also that black adoptees to white
families score 110, which is often touted as showing that environment
is the cause of the descrepency, but that white adoptees show an
average of 120.
http://christianparty.net/sathu2.htm
Borderline Retarded 70-75 IQ - Seligman p.151
Black Delinquents 74 Shuey p. 498
Africans (Africa) 75 Lynn as cited by Murray p. 288
Southern Black children 80.5 Shuey
White Delinquents 81 Shuey p. 498
Black Felons 81 Shuey p. 498
Black Females 82 Interpolated from SAT estimate
Black Average 85 IQ Seligman p.149
Colored From Africa 85 Lynn as cited by Murray p.
Dull-Normal 80-90 IQ Textbook by Wechsler
Border Black Children 87 Shuey, and SAT Tables, 1991
Northern Black Children 87.6 Shuey, and SAT Tables, 1991
Black G12 NAEP Math 89 (7)
Black US Northern Average 90 IQ Jensen(4)
Urban North Black 91.1 Shuey
Hisp G12 NAEP Math 92 (7)
White Felons 92 Shey p. 498
White Chronic Welfare 92 Murray
Overall Criminals 92 Murray
Black Calif Math CLAS 92 A.Hu estimate(6)
Malays 96 Lynn 1977 (Seligman)
White American Girls 96 SAT Tables, 1991
Black Reading CLAS 96 A.Hu estimate (6)
White Unwed - No Welfare 98 Murray
Mixed Child of Black 100 Murray p. 310 (5)
Black Children Boston, NYC 100 See note
Adopted Asian Children 100 Sandra Scarr
American Students 100 Cattell's culture Fair Test
British 100 Lynn 1977 (Seligman)
Average Intelligence 90-109 IQ Textbook by Wechsler
Mainland China 101 Lynn (Seligman)
White CLAS Reading & Math 100 A.Hu set by definition (6)
Asian Calif CLAS Math 102 A.Hu (7)
White G12 NAEP math 102 (7), and SAT Tables, 1991
British Children 102 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Malnourished Korean Adult 102 Winick, Meyer and Harris 1975 (2)
Asian Average 103-4 Murray
Korean (est) 105 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Chinese Hong Kong 106 IQ Chan & Lynn 1989
Chinese Hong Kong 106.7 Lynn 1982 (Seligman)
Japanese 9 Year Olds 107 IQ Shigehisa & Lynn 1991
Korean 108.5 IQ Lynn & song 1994
Asian G12 NAEP math 109 (7)
Korean Children in Korea 109 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Chinese Hong Kong 109.8 Lynn 1982 (Seligman)
Bright-Normal 110-119 IQ Textbook Wechseler
Korean Adults in Belgium 110 Frydman & Lynn 1989
Adopted Black Children 110 Sandra Scarr
Chinese 110 Lynn 1977 (Seligman) Well
Nourished Korean Adult 112 Winick, Meyer and Harris 1975 (2)
North Dakota Public Schools 112 SAT Table, 1991, and NAEP
Jewish Boys 112.8 verbal Ann Arbor Institute
(Seligman)
Blacks at UC Berkeley 115 A.Hu top 15% UC definition
Texas Non-public Schools 116 naepmath.pdf
Blacks in Math Program 116 Barclay school Baltimore MD
Adopted White children 120 Sandra Scarr
Blacks at MIT 120 A.Hu based on SAT 1985
Whites at UC Berkeley 124 A.Hu top 5% top 1/3 of UC
Superior 120-129 IQ Text Wechsleler
Above Superior 130 & above By Definition
White/Asian MIT 138 A.Hu (top0.5% of population)
Erik A. Mattila
60s radicalism originated on the campus, it didn't "find its way there."
eam
Oldrivel
<gwge...@uniserve.com> writes:
>Nd...us Shinobby Men are much sought after as well....
>
>Wayne George tsc.sd.
>First Nations Artist
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~
i'm sure that must be true, Mr.Wayne George
Its great for someone to have such a high self esteem, as I tend to do the
same.
However, my vibes are unable to visualize you from that perspective,
since I have a definite one sided point of view pertaining to the
much sought after.
<G>
Grumpy au Contraire
brojack wrote:
>
> On 15 Oct 2003 13:17:21 -0700, man_in_...@yahoo.com (MIB529)
> wrote:
>
> >Bro...@windswept.net (BroJack) wrote in message news:<3f8c959...@news.east.earthlink.net>...
>
It has long been known that IQ varies between ethnic groups and the
below pretty well establishes that as fact. Shockley (sp?) pointed
this out years ago before political correctness began to falsely skew
basic information.
That being said, environmental considerations often can overcome other
detractors. Your last comment reinforces my contention that things like
parental/personal responsibility play a major role in final outcomes
along with a 100% color blind application of educational resources.
JT
--
MIB529
That link already makes it suspect. The Christian Party's a well-known
white racist group. So PLEASE link to a peer-reviewed journal next
time.
BroJack
wrote:
The Christian Party is merely submitting a list. Look at the name of
the psychometricians. Which ones give you problems? Which ones do
you dispute?
BroJack
BroJack
<Gru...@doofis.FAKEcom> wrote:
>
>
>brojack wrote:
>>
>> On 15 Oct 2003 13:17:21 -0700, man_in_...@yahoo.com (MIB529)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Bro...@windswept.net (BroJack) wrote in message news:<3f8c959...@news.east.earthlink.net>...
>>
>
>
>
>It has long been known that IQ varies between ethnic groups and the
>below pretty well establishes that as fact. Shockley (sp?) pointed
>this out years ago before political correctness began to falsely skew
>basic information.
>
>That being said, environmental considerations often can overcome other
>detractors. Your last comment reinforces my contention that things like
>parental/personal responsibility play a major role in final outcomes
>along with a 100% color blind application of educational resources.
>
>
>JT
How do you explain the lower IQs of wealthy black children inthe
recent Shaker Heights Ohio studies? And the Minnesota Transracial
Adoption Studies? And the transracial adoptions studies undertaken by
Starr and Loneburg?
BroJack
Wayne George
...there's only one "Faa-bee-oh"...nd lotsa Shinobs.
do the math :-)
Wayne George tsc.sd.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Oldrivel" <oldr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031015184645...@mb-m03.aol.com...
Jack Strong
wrote:
Take it they didn't teach you about sampling bias in your eugenics
classes eh?
BroJack
Take it you're totally ignorant re: the studies above.
BroJack
MIB529
> brojack wrote:
> >
> > On 15 Oct 2003 13:17:21 -0700, man_in_...@yahoo.com (MIB529)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Bro...@windswept.net (BroJack) wrote in message news:<3f8c959...@news.east.earthlink.net>...
> >
>
>
>
> It has long been known that IQ varies between ethnic groups and the
> below pretty well establishes that as fact. Shockley (sp?)
who was WAY out of his field. The man was a physicist, not a
psychologist. Just because they're both P words...
MIB529
> >>It has long been known that IQ varies between ethnic groups and the
> >>below pretty well establishes that as fact. Shockley (sp?) pointed
> >>this out years ago before political correctness began to falsely skew
> >>basic information.
> >>
> >>That being said, environmental considerations often can overcome other
> >>detractors. Your last comment reinforces my contention that things like
> >>parental/personal responsibility play a major role in final outcomes
> >>along with a 100% color blind application of educational resources.
> >>
> >>
> >>JT
> >
> >How do you explain the lower IQs of wealthy black children inthe
> >recent Shaker Heights Ohio studies? And the Minnesota Transracial
> >Adoption Studies? And the transracial adoptions studies undertaken by
> >Starr and Loneburg?
>
> Take it they didn't teach you about sampling bias in your eugenics
> classes eh?
And let's not forget throwing out data that don't favor a the desired
results. I'm reminded of recapitulation. Nonwhite adults were like
white children, the theory went. However, it turned out humans were
largely a case of the opposite, neoteny. Neotenous traits spotted by
Bolk (1926) include:
Orthognathy. (Flat face.)
Reduction of body hair.
Form of external ear.
Epicanthic eyefold.
Central position of the foramen magnum. (The hole in the bottom of the
skull. It migrates backward in other primates.)
Persistance of cranial sutures in an advanced age.
Labia majora.
Structure of the hand and foot.
Structure of the pelvis.
Ventrally directed position of the vagina.
Certain variations in the tooth row and cranial sutures.
Other cases listed by Bolk include lighter skin (fraudulent; in
reality, apes have lighter skin) and high relative brain weight
(actually a recapitulatory trait, as the brain develops most in the
later stages). Bolk also listed a long life expectancy, forgetting
obvious environmental impact.
If nonwhite adults were like white children, neoteny would in all
fairness mean that the heirarchy was reversed, no? I only say so for
rhetorical purposes. Now, white adults were like nonwhite children.
BroJack
MIB529
Are they talking about mean IQ (which is impossible, as each IQ number
corresponds to a percentile) or median IQ? If they're talking about
mean, they should include standard deviations. If they're talking
about median, they should include quartiles. Oh, wait, I forgot, you
can't get the results you want if you talk about variation among
members of the same race.
Murray used a RETENTION test, not an actual IQ test. So he's out right
away. Jensen's ideas, largely an "homage" to Spearman and Burt,
violate scientific cosmology: No organ or chemical is responsible for
the g factor, so Spearman said it must be a metaphysical force (Read:
Untestable).
About Lynn...You might want to look at Lynn's own data on Catholics
and Protestants in Northern Ireland. Or is religion encoded in your
DNA as well?
Also notice that adopted Orientals only got 100, while adopted blacks
got 110. OTOH, Orientals did better than both blacks and whites when
not adopted.
BroJack
wrote:
Curious that these tests by-and-;large are consistent with "Bell
Curve."
>Also notice that adopted Orientals only got 100, while adopted blacks
>got 110. OTOH, Orientals did better than both blacks and whites when
>not adopted.
That's nice.
Not dispositive of the issue, but a nice topic to discuss.
BroJack
Erik A. Mattila
There was a study done several years ago - I can't remember the details
- but some magazine (Natural History? It's all a fog) published an
article "African Babies are Smarter." Created a stir - I think it was
in the late 60s. But the studies demonstrated that healthy African
babies out-performed other "races" cognitively for the first four or
five years, but the rest caught up.
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
There was no conclusive results from the Shaker Heights study. Ogbu
said that the problem was that Black parents and students had a negative
attitude about education because it was a "white man's" thing, and his
critics argued that it was the schools who expected poor performance
from Black students. Whatever, IQ scores aren't discrete measures from
the whole environment - they reflect cultural phenomena as any testing
does. I don't think IQ scores even played a major role in the studies -
except for your Lord and Master David Horowitz, of course.
eam
BroJack
That's the same bullshit and excuses Al Sharpton gave.
You reds ape the black party line quite well.
BroJack
Erik A. Mattila
IQ testing is a ruse, anyway, which is why the Stanford Binet has always
been suspect. There is absolutely no way that a human being can be
isolated from culture and tested. I know of one study in California
that isolated "testing culture" itself and showed how different social
groups respond differently to the whole idea of "taking tests."
My first semester in a J.C. required a bullshit "Orientation" class that
everybody hated. And we were all tested for I.Q. in the course of
semester. Everyone in the class scored low - I think I scored 90 making
me an intelligent moron. I was a little concerned, actually. But two
days later I took the Air Force intelligence test at a recruitment
center, and sored above the 95th percentile in all categories. The
recruitment Sarge started to drool, and said "Man, we're going to put
you into hard core electronics!" (which is why a decided to wait and be
drafted.)
But the point is that the entire "Orientation" class had a negative
attitude about the course, was completely bored with the professor, and
the professor himself did not have the minimum qualifications to
administer the test.
Erik
Jack Strong
wrote:
Take it you're totally ignorant of the effect selection bias has on
the ability to generalize outward from a sample, and the cultural
loading that occurs in IQ tests. Come back when you have a better
understanding of what you're talking about.
Then we'll start discussing the erroneous assumptions underlying IQ
tests.
Grumpy au Contraire
I said "often," not always...
Grumpy au Contraire
Well, a chicken fresh out of the egg is fully functional (for a chicken)
and yet that is about where it remains throught out its lifetime.
Naw... I don't wanna go thar...
Grumpy au Contraire
Yeah... But history has proven him correct but it's not worth (to me) a
haggling session...
Grumpy au Contraire
"Erik A. Mattila" wrote:
>
>
snip
>
> IQ testing is a ruse, anyway, which is why the Stanford Binet has always
> been suspect. There is absolutely no way that a human being can be
> isolated from culture and tested. I know of one study in California
> that isolated "testing culture" itself and showed how different social
> groups respond differently to the whole idea of "taking tests."
>
> My first semester in a J.C. required a bullshit "Orientation" class that
> everybody hated. And we were all tested for I.Q. in the course of
> semester. Everyone in the class scored low - I think I scored 90 making
> me an intelligent moron. I was a little concerned, actually. But two
> days later I took the Air Force intelligence test at a recruitment
> center, and sored above the 95th percentile in all categories. The
> recruitment Sarge started to drool, and said "Man, we're going to put
> you into hard core electronics!" (which is why a decided to wait and be
> drafted.)
>
> But the point is that the entire "Orientation" class had a negative
> attitude about the course, was completely bored with the professor, and
> the professor himself did not have the minimum qualifications to
> administer the test.
>
> Erik
I don't know when you served, (Obviously before 1975), but wasn't the
OCT a sort of intelligence test?
brojack
<jackstr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Take it you believe that we're talking about one sample. Take it
further that you have other studies which conflict with these.
>Then we'll start discussing the erroneous assumptions underlying IQ
>tests.
Take it that you have never been introduced to the concepts of
corfficient matrices and their relationship to the core matrix. Take
it that you have no understanding relating to the transformation of
derivational modes.
BroJack
brojack
Despite its flaws, it is still the best single predictor of success.
You talk of culture. Have American blacks/Indians/ been living in
Sweden? Samoa? Antarctica? on Mars?
>My first semester in a J.C. required a bullshit "Orientation" class that
>everybody hated. And we were all tested for I.Q. in the course of
>semester. Everyone in the class scored low - I think I scored 90 making
>me an intelligent moron. I was a little concerned, actually. But two
>days later I took the Air Force intelligence test at a recruitment
>center, and sored above the 95th percentile in all categories. The
>recruitment Sarge started to drool, and said "Man, we're going to put
>you into hard core electronics!" (which is why a decided to wait and be
>drafted.)
>But the point is that the entire "Orientation" class had a negative
>attitude about the course, was completely bored with the professor, and
>the professor himself did not have the minimum qualifications to
>administer the test.
Either the teacher at Compton was perpetrating a hoax or the military
testing was inflated.
Take a Wechsler when you get a chance.
BroJack
Jack Strong
wrote:
You can take as many biased samples as you want Brojack. If they're
biased they will result in a biased aggregate estimate.
>
>>Then we'll start discussing the erroneous assumptions underlying IQ
>>tests.
>
>Take it that you have never been introduced to the concepts of
>corfficient matrices and their relationship to the core matrix. Take
>it that you have no understanding relating to the transformation of
>derivational modes.
Take it you've never been introduced to core principles of
measurement. The number one principle being that if your underlying
assumptions are incorrect no mathematical model can result in valid
generalizations.
I've actually know a little about measurement and assessment. I'd be
curious to hear what you know. Why don't you write a paragraph
explaing the above concepts. My guess is you're talking out your ass
right now and don't realize that a sample correlation matrix may in no
way approximate the population matrix.
I'll make it simple for you. Why don't you just write a paragraph
explaining the transformation of derivational modes.
>
>BroJack
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
Lane Baldwin
But, Jack...he *has* to include the cultural bias as much as possible in
order to substantiate his racist, eugenic position. If he even considered
the inherent bias in the pseudo-science to which he adheres, his head might
well explode.
--
Lane
Starbucks Ends Dispute
www.haidabuckscafe.com
And WE WON!!!
Jack Strong
Seems that a guy with a 13.8 IQ (shucks didn't know they went that
low) who lost his government job to a minority wouldn't be so
enthralled with IQ tests anyways.
Gringo
wrote:
>Take it that you have never been introduced to the concepts of
>corfficient matrices and their relationship to the core matrix. Take
>it that you have no understanding relating to the transformation of
>derivational modes.
You're just throwing around a bunch of adademic sounding polysyllabic
words hoping to sound knowledgeable and erudite. No one here will be
fooled by it ,sorry.
Erik A. Mattila
No, that's what the studies that you cited said. Read them, and don't
trust Horowitz. He's a friggen liar who saw that he could make a lot of
money catering to the fanactics on the right, so he turned in his
liberal tennies in favor of jackboots. Now be a good little tad and go
polish yours.
eam
Erik A. Mattila
Is that "Officer's Candidate Test?" I didn't take one for the Air Force,
only the basic appitude test. And I didn't serve in the Air Force,
since I was scared out by that "hard core electronics" language. But
the tests I took in the Army qualified me for OCS, but I didn't think
the extra two year commitment was worth it.
Erik
>
>
>
Another Wise Guy - Macon, GA USA
>everybody hated. And we were all tested for I.Q. in the course of
If we didn't have any morons, who would defend the bogus theories
of the envr=iromental wackos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Just Another Internet Wise Guy Macon, GA USA |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lane Baldwin
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:00:40 GMT, "Lane Baldwin"
> <la...@NOSPAMbluethunder.org> wrote:
>
>
> Seems that a guy with a 13.8 IQ (shucks didn't know they went that
> low) who lost his government job to a minority wouldn't be so
> enthralled with IQ tests anyways.
>
>
>
his era was 138, so he claims to have scored that high. that's why he's in
love with IQ tests. But, I gotta tell you, everyone missed the easy
slam-dunk yesterday...when Doh!Jack claimed that IQ is "still the best
predictor of success"...which it isn't. EQ (Emotional Intelligence) is a far
better overall predictor of success, even in professions requiring a high
IQ, such as rocket science (which most gov't service ain't!). EQ is the
ability to manage one's emotions, as well as deal with the emotions of
others. Some of the largest companies in the US (and therefore, the world)
realized this years ago, and the trend only continues. The work of Daniel
Goleman, PhD, and David Ryback, PhD are of particular note.
Grumpy au Contraire
Yes, Officer Candidate Test.
When did you serve?
If in the Army, (at least in 1963), the OCT test was mandatory IF you
scored above a certain threshold on other "aptitude" tests.
Oh, and I agree about it not being worth it. Not the extra two year
commitment but the fact that the first (at least) assignment would be in
the infantry...
BroJack
<emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>>>There was no conclusive results from the Shaker Heights study. Ogbu
>>>said that the problem was that Black parents and students had a negative
>>>attitude about education because it was a "white man's" thing, and his
>>>critics argued that it was the schools who expected poor performance
>>
>>>from Black students. Whatever, IQ scores aren't discrete measures from
>>
>>>the whole environment - they reflect cultural phenomena as any testing
>>>does. I don't think IQ scores even played a major role in the studies -
>>>except for your Lord and Master David Horowitz, of course.
>>>
>>>eam
What type of "conclusive results" are you looking for? Also, keep in
mind that tests have been dumbed-down with respect to "culture" for
some time now. Further, you failed to address the Minnesota and Scarr
studies.
BroJack
BroJack
<jackstr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Take it you believe all tests which conflict with your pristine view
of humanity are biased.
>>
>>>Then we'll start discussing the erroneous assumptions underlying IQ
>>>tests.
>>
>>Take it that you have never been introduced to the concepts of
>>corfficient matrices and their relationship to the core matrix. Take
>>it that you have no understanding relating to the transformation of
>>derivational modes.
>
>Take it you've never been introduced to core principles of
>measurement. The number one principle being that if your underlying
>assumptions are incorrect no mathematical model can result in valid
>generalizations.
>
>I've actually know a little about measurement and assessment. I'd be
>curious to hear what you know. Why don't you write a paragraph
>explaing the above concepts. My guess is you're talking out your ass
>right now and don't realize that a sample correlation matrix may in no
>way approximate the population matrix.
>
>I'll make it simple for you. Why don't you just write a paragraph
>explaining the transformation of derivational modes.
Take it you will first stick to the point and will show me the flaws
and bias in the studies of Scarr, Minnesota, and Shaker Heights.
After that, we can delve into psychometrics in general.
BroJack
BroJack
<la...@NOSPAMbluethunder.org> wrote:
Tell ya about bias. Black college grads were failing the FSEE test in
record numbers, so the gubamint revised it and called it the PACE.
Question 6 showed pictures of six identical black kids dribbling a
basketball, and one nerdy-looking white boy with coke-bottle glasses
and carrying school books.
The question was: "Which one is the honky?"
Blacks continued to fail the test and nowadays the gubamint doesn't
even give a test. Even you could be hired.
The point is: Tests have been dumbed-down in the name of "culture" for
some time now.
BroJack
Erik A. Mattila
13 Dec 65 - 11 Dec 67. Ft. Bliss, Fitzsimmons Hospital Post Engineers,
Ist Log, Saigon Support Command, Real Estate, and 75th Engineer Bat. at
Ft. Lewis.
> Oh, and I agree about it not being worth it. Not the extra two year
> commitment but the fact that the first (at least) assignment would be in
> the infantry...
Oh, yeah. A Butterbar in VN - a high risk assignment from friendly
fire. (actually, the "fragging" incidents hadn't started when I was there.)
I think if I had made that option I would have ended up in Warrant
Officer Training for the Corp of Engineers. They assigned me right
after Basic to Fitzsimmons instead of AIT because I had a education/work
history in drafting and design. My CO at Ft. Bliss told me I was too
old to make a good grunt - all of 23. They liked the teenagers who
still believed in their immortality.
Erik
>
>
>
>
Erik A. Mattila
I wasn't looking for any conclusive results. I was stating that there
were none, especially one that said that the students did poorly because
of low IQs. That wasn't even on the table in the debate over the Shaker
Heights study.
I chose not to address the other studies. What's the point of doing so?
Erik
Jack Strong
wrote:
Take it you believe that all tests that confirm your preconceived
notions regardless of their obvious flaws are unbiased. Not a very
scientific point of view you hold there is it Brojack?
>
>>>
>>>>Then we'll start discussing the erroneous assumptions underlying IQ
>>>>tests.
>>>
>>>Take it that you have never been introduced to the concepts of
>>>corfficient matrices and their relationship to the core matrix. Take
>>>it that you have no understanding relating to the transformation of
>>>derivational modes.
>>
>>Take it you've never been introduced to core principles of
>>measurement. The number one principle being that if your underlying
>>assumptions are incorrect no mathematical model can result in valid
>>generalizations.
>>
>>I've actually know a little about measurement and assessment. I'd be
>>curious to hear what you know. Why don't you write a paragraph
>>explaing the above concepts. My guess is you're talking out your ass
>>right now and don't realize that a sample correlation matrix may in no
>>way approximate the population matrix.
>>
>>I'll make it simple for you. Why don't you just write a paragraph
>>explaining the transformation of derivational modes.
>
>Take it you will first stick to the point and will show me the flaws
>and bias in the studies of Scarr, Minnesota, and Shaker Heights.
If you can't see the obvious bias in he selection of the samples of
those studies you certainly aren't going to be able to discuss the
more sophisticated mathematical aspects.
>
>After that, we can delve into psychometrics in general.
>
Brojack speak translation-You caught me bullshitting about
psychometrics and now I'm going to bail out.
How embarassing for you to get caught in a bluff so rapidly. If you
don't understand the underlying psychometric issues of IQ testing you
certainly aren't going to understand how the bias of studies influence
its generalizability.
Why don't you just write a paragraph explaining the transformation of
derivational modes then we'll carry on. I want to make sure you're
properly equiped.
BroJack
<jackstr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Take it you will show us these obvious flaws.
Take it you cannot resist the cultural urge to throw up a "smoke
screen" to draw attention away from your burden to show the flaws and
bias in the studies under discussion.
BroJack
jake
wrote:
No such burden exists ..
This piece of secondary research is a classic example of the abuse of
social statistics..
whatever the merits any of the individual sources may or may not have
is not the point..
1) as a method of data collection..this hotch potch of disparate
sources is simply grotesque..
2)The main threat to validity is that it is open to an infinite number
of rival explanations..
3)the internal validity (is it measuring what it purports to measure?)
is simply non existent..
4)given this any argument about external validity (can it be
generalised to to the main population?)..is a moot point not worth
considering..
Its only merit is as a classic example for students of social research
of alreadying having your counclusions and rummaging around for data
to fit them..
--
"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
never attained."
Haile Sellassie
Lridge164
<la...@NOSPAMbluethunder.org> writes:
>But, I gotta tell you, everyone missed the easy
>slam-dunk yesterday...when Doh!Jack claimed that IQ is "still the best
>predictor of success"...which it isn't. EQ (Emotional Intelligence) is a far
>better overall predictor of success, even in professions requiring a high
>IQ, such as rocket science (which most gov't service ain't!). EQ is the
>ability to manage one's emotions, as well as deal with the emotions of
>others. Some of the largest companies in the US (and therefore, the world)
>realized this years ago, and the trend only continues. The work of Daniel
a high IQ & emotional intelligence aside,
success in da bidness world can be achieved by
an average intelligence & a college degree
( dat's proof to personell & upper management dat u be smart )
*
however, success can not be achieved witout all dese
other very important characteristics:
1. superior posterior osculatin' capabilities
( dat might fall under emotional intelligence)
2. bein' a two-faced sumbitch
(dat's a cut-throat back-stabber)
3. bein' a snow job artist who can talk
outta both sides of ur mouth at da same time
4. bein' a master manipulator
( dat's a "motivater" who gits others to do da work,
whilst he/she sits on his/her ass & takes all da credit
fer a job well done )
5. last but not least, a light complexion
*
i know all dis be true, bcuz i reads dilbert
on a regular basis
brojack
Show us why.
>2)The main threat to validity is that it is open to an infinite number
>of rival explanations..
'Splain.
>3)the internal validity (is it measuring what it purports to measure?)
>is simply non existent..
Show us,instead of making unfounded allegations.
>4)given this any argument about external validity (can it be
>generalised to to the main population?)..is a moot point not worth
>considering..
You say nothing.
>Its only merit is as a classic example for students of social research
>of alreadying having your counclusions and rummaging around for data
>to fit them..
Actually, the studies embarrass you and so you condemn them without
rationale.
>--
>"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
> finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
> first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
> human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
> that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
> international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
>never attained."
>
>Haile Sellassie
Wait a minute. Color-blindness is no longer in vogue. Excessive
race-consciousness is. Second-class citizens? You mean whites who
are subject to affirmative action, I presume.
BroJack
MIB529
> Curve."
But those little things like Lynn's own data about Northern Ireland
show that discrimination has an effect on IQ, BroJackalope.
> >Also notice that adopted Orientals only got 100, while adopted blacks
> >got 110. OTOH, Orientals did better than both blacks and whites when
> >not adopted.
>
> That's nice.
>
> Not dispositive of the issue, but a nice topic to discuss.
Actually, it is dispositive, because it shows variation within members
of the SAME race, which disproves your theories, BroJackass.
BTW, I can play the racist game too. How about we go over sexual
dimorphism (differences in body shape, excluding the genitalia)?
Gorillas are more dimorphic than orangs, orangs are more dimorphic
than chimps, chimps are more dimorphic than bonobos, bonobos are more
dimorphic (albeit only slightly) than humans. Of the races, whites
show the most dimorphism and American Indians show the least
dimorphism. This, combined with the general recapitulatory anatomy of
whites, tells me that whites are less evolved.
BroJack
wrote:
>bro...@windswept.org (BroJack) wrote
>> Curious that these tests by-and-;large are consistent with "Bell
>> Curve."
>
>But those little things like Lynn's own data about Northern Ireland
>show that discrimination has an effect on IQ, BroJackalope.
The tests as a whole seem to be consistent with "Bell Curve."
Maybe, it's a vast KKK conspiracy.
>> >Also notice that adopted Orientals only got 100, while adopted blacks
>> >got 110. OTOH, Orientals did better than both blacks and whites when
>> >not adopted.
>>
>> That's nice.
>>
>> Not dispositive of the issue, but a nice topic to discuss.
>
>Actually, it is dispositive, because it shows variation within members
>of the SAME race, which disproves your theories, BroJackass.
Of course. There are variations within the same family.
>BTW, I can play the racist game too. How about we go over sexual
>dimorphism (differences in body shape, excluding the genitalia)?
>Gorillas are more dimorphic than orangs, orangs are more dimorphic
>than chimps, chimps are more dimorphic than bonobos, bonobos are more
>dimorphic (albeit only slightly) than humans. Of the races, whites
>show the most dimorphism and American Indians show the least
>dimorphism. This, combined with the general recapitulatory anatomy of
>whites, tells me that whites are less evolved.
It's curious that you folks never object when it is stated that blacks
have narrower hips for a more efficient stride; wider shoulders, less
body fat, more skeletal muscle; considerably more fast twitch fibers
for power and bursts of speed; 3 to 19% more testosterone; quicker
knee-jerk reflex ... even "negative" assertions such as heavier bone
structure and smaller chest cavities which are not conducive to
swimming are accepted without whine.
But let someone even investigate the IQ gap, and WATCH OUT!
BroJack
MIB529
> >>>>It has long been known that IQ varies between ethnic groups and the
> >>>>below pretty well establishes that as fact. Shockley (sp?) pointed
> >>>>this out years ago before political correctness began to falsely skew
> >>>>basic information.
> >>>>
> >>>>That being said, environmental considerations often can overcome other
> >>>>detractors. Your last comment reinforces my contention that things like
> >>>>parental/personal responsibility play a major role in final outcomes
> >>>>along with a 100% color blind application of educational resources.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>JT
> >>>
> >>>How do you explain the lower IQs of wealthy black children inthe
> >>>recent Shaker Heights Ohio studies? And the Minnesota Transracial
> >>>Adoption Studies? And the transracial adoptions studies undertaken by
> >>>Starr and Loneburg?
> >>
> >>Take it they didn't teach you about sampling bias in your eugenics
> >>classes eh?
> >
> >
> - but some magazine (Natural History? It's all a fog) published an
> article "African Babies are Smarter." Created a stir - I think it was
> in the late 60s. But the studies demonstrated that healthy African
> babies out-performed other "races" cognitively for the first four or
> five years, but the rest caught up.
Hans Eysenck. He naturally did the whole deconstructionist act on it,
pointing out that, among whites, babies who develop earlier are less
intelligent as adults. It's the old neoteny argument (which was itself
amazing - the full beard, Grecian nose, and other traits so loved by
recapitulationists were instantly forgotten).
Problem is, variation between populations isn't the same as variation
among memebers of the same population. Let's take cephalic index and
height, two easily-measured traits. In Australian aboriginals, height
is positively correlated to cephalic index. (Gould, 1977) But in
populations as a whole, I could find tall dolichocephalic populations,
short brachycephalic populations, and short dolichocephalic
populations aplenty. I could only find a few tall brachycephalic
populations: Mongols, northern Chinese, and Austrians. Therefore, the
correlation between cephalic index and height between populations is
weaker, and the REVERSE of what it is in a given population. It also
fails by sex: Women are slightly more brachycephalic than men, and
also shorter.
jake
wrote:
LOL!
you have the cart before the horse..
Its up to YOU to show what meaning this gruesome collection of
definitions cobbled together randomly by the "christian" party
and fraudelently presented as quantative data is supposed to have..
http://christianparty.net/sathu2.htm
Borderline Retarded 70-75 IQ - Seligman p.151
Black Delinquents 74 Shuey p. 498
Africans (Africa) 75 Lynn as cited by Murray p. 288
Southern Black children 80.5 Shuey
White Delinquents 81 Shuey p. 498
Black Felons 81 Shuey p. 498
Black Females 82 Interpolated from SAT estimate
Black Average 85 IQ Seligman p.149
Colored From Africa 85 Lynn as cited by Murray p.
Dull-Normal 80-90 IQ Textbook by Wechsler
Border Black Children 87 Shuey, and SAT Tables, 1991
Northern Black Children 87.6 Shuey, and SAT Tables, 1991
Black G12 NAEP Math 89 (7)
Black US Northern Average 90 IQ Jensen(4)
Urban North Black 91.1 Shuey
Hisp G12 NAEP Math 92 (7)
White Felons 92 Shey p. 498
White Chronic Welfare 92 Murray
Overall Criminals 92 Murray
Black Calif Math CLAS 92 A.Hu estimate(6)
Malays 96 Lynn 1977 (Seligman)
White American Girls 96 SAT Tables, 1991
Black Reading CLAS 96 A.Hu estimate (6)
White Unwed - No Welfare 98 Murray
Mixed Child of Black 100 Murray p. 310 (5)
Black Children Boston, NYC 100 See note
Adopted Asian Children 100 Sandra Scarr
American Students 100 Cattell's culture Fair Test
British 100 Lynn 1977 (Seligman)
Average Intelligence 90-109 IQ Textbook by Wechsler
Mainland China 101 Lynn (Seligman)
White CLAS Reading & Math 100 A.Hu set by definition (6)
Asian Calif CLAS Math 102 A.Hu (7)
White G12 NAEP math 102 (7), and SAT Tables, 1991
British Children 102 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Malnourished Korean Adult 102 Winick, Meyer and Harris 1975 (2)
Asian Average 103-4 Murray
Korean (est) 105 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Chinese Hong Kong 106 IQ Chan & Lynn 1989
Chinese Hong Kong 106.7 Lynn 1982 (Seligman)
Japanese 9 Year Olds 107 IQ Shigehisa & Lynn 1991
Korean 108.5 IQ Lynn & song 1994
Asian G12 NAEP math 109 (7)
Korean Children in Korea 109 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
Chinese Hong Kong 109.8 Lynn 1982 (Seligman)
Bright-Normal 110-119 IQ Textbook Wechseler
Korean Adults in Belgium 110 Frydman & Lynn 1989
Adopted Black Children 110 Sandra Scarr
Chinese 110 Lynn 1977 (Seligman) Well
Nourished Korean Adult 112 Winick, Meyer and Harris 1975 (2)
North Dakota Public Schools 112 SAT Table, 1991, and NAEP
Jewish Boys 112.8 verbal Ann Arbor Institute
(Seligman)
Blacks at UC Berkeley 115 A.Hu top 15% UC definition
Texas Non-public Schools 116 naepmath.pdf
Blacks in Math Program 116 Barclay school Baltimore MD
Adopted White children 120 Sandra Scarr
Blacks at MIT 120 A.Hu based on SAT 1985
Whites at UC Berkeley 124 A.Hu top 5% top 1/3 of UC
Superior 120-129 IQ Text Wechsleler
Above Superior 130 & above By Definition
White/Asian MIT 138 A.Hu (top0.5% of population)
>
>>2)The main threat to validity is that it is open to an infinite number
>>of rival explanations..
>
>'Splain.
Africans (Africa) 75 Lynn as cited by Murray p. 288
for example the lower measures on european and american IQ tests
in the case of africans.. takes no account of the effects of lack of
protein in formative years ..to name but one rival explation..
thats without going into the fact that "africans" includes whites
>
>>3)the internal validity (is it measuring what it purports to measure?)
>>is simply non existent..
>
>Show us,instead of making unfounded allegations.
British Children 102 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
black british children????
>
>>4)given this any argument about external validity (can it be
>>generalised to to the main population?)..is a moot point not worth
>>considering..
>
>You say nothing.
On the contrary the bizarre hiercharchy published by the "christian"
party says nothing except to display their predjudice and penchant for
pseudo-science..
>
>>Its only merit is as a classic example for students of social research
>>of alreadying having your counclusions and rummaging around for data
>>to fit them..
>
>Actually, the studies embarrass you and so you condemn them without
>rationale.
this grotesque presentation says absolutely nothing in regard to any
of these studies quoted in the service of racist ideology..
>>--
>>"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
>> finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
>> first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
>> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
>> human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
>> that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
>> international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
>>never attained."
>>
>>Haile Sellassie
>
>Wait a minute. Color-blindness is no longer in vogue. Excessive
>race-consciousness is. Second-class citizens? You mean whites who
>are subject to affirmative action, I presume.
what part of
"until the color of a man's
skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes"
do you fail to understand?
---
A South politician preaches to the poor white man,
"You got more than the blacks, don't complain.
You're better than them, you been born with white skin," they explain.
And the Negro's name
Is used it is plain
For the politician's gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.
The deputy sheriffs, the soldiers, the governors get paid,
And the marshals and cops get the same,
But the poor white man's used in the hands of them all like a tool.
He's taught in his school
From the start by the rule
That the laws are with him
To protect his white skin
To keep up his hate
So he never thinks straight
'Bout the shape that he's in
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.
From the poverty shacks, he looks from the cracks to the tracks,
And the hoof beats pound in his brain.
And he's taught how to walk in a pack
Shoot in the back
With his fist in a clinch
To hang and to lynch
To hide 'neath the hood
To kill with no pain
Like a dog on a chain
He ain't got no name
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.
Bob Dylan
>
>BroJack
BroJack
Which of the psychometricians give you problems?
Is it a vast KKK conspiracy?
In the States, liberals blame it on black chilluns eating lead paint
chips. Funny thing is: Before whites were driven from the inner
cities, we also had to contend with the same chips.
>>
>>>3)the internal validity (is it measuring what it purports to measure?)
>>>is simply non existent..
>>
>>Show us,instead of making unfounded allegations.
>
>British Children 102 IQ Lynn & Song 1994
>
>black british children????
White Brit children.
>
>
>>
>>>4)given this any argument about external validity (can it be
>>>generalised to to the main population?)..is a moot point not worth
>>>considering..
>>
>>You say nothing.
>
>On the contrary the bizarre hiercharchy published by the "christian"
>party says nothing except to display their predjudice and penchant for
>pseudo-science..
Again, forget the Christian Party and tell us which of the
psychometricians are quacks?
>
>>
>>>Its only merit is as a classic example for students of social research
>>>of alreadying having your counclusions and rummaging around for data
>>>to fit them..
>>
>>Actually, the studies embarrass you and so you condemn them without
>>rationale.
>
>this grotesque presentation says absolutely nothing in regard to any
>of these studies quoted in the service of racist ideology..
That's because they aren't racist, duh.
>
>
>>>--
>>>"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
>>> finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
>>> first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
>>> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
>>> human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
>>> that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
>>> international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
>>>never attained."
>>>
>>>Haile Sellassie
>>
>>Wait a minute. Color-blindness is no longer in vogue. Excessive
>>race-consciousness is. Second-class citizens? You mean whites who
>>are subject to affirmative action, I presume.
>
>what part of
>
>"until the color of a man's
> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes"
>do you fail to understand?
Don't tell it to me, Rastus; tell it to the blacks who want
preferential treatment for the color of their skin.
In his glue-sniffing days.
BroJack
jake
wrote:
psychometricians?
dont know if you would be measurers are psycho or not..
but the human mind cannot be measured..
neither can brain functions in the simplistic way your
"psychmetricians" mantra suggests..
whats with all these outmoded 19 century junk science concepts you
drag
up?
its the 21st century now..
>
>Is it a vast KKK conspiracy?
dont know what kind of conspiracy your "christian" party
may or may not wish to engender..
my best guess is it wont get very far.... as they dont seem to even be
able to afford a proper website.
>http://christianparty.net/sathu2.htm
This site has exceeded its limit of 20 MB of transfer per day. The
account can be upgraded to a paid account to increase the transfer
limit to 3 Gigs of transfer per month in your 150m.com user tools
section
really?
rather misleading description then
as with the rest..
that seems a key factor here..
you confuse descriptions with explanations..
they are not the same thing at all..
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>4)given this any argument about external validity (can it be
>>>>generalised to to the main population?)..is a moot point not worth
>>>>considering..
>>>
>>>You say nothing.
>>
>>On the contrary the bizarre hiercharchy published by the "christian"
>>party says nothing except to display their predjudice and penchant for
>>pseudo-science..
>
>Again, forget the Christian Party and tell us which of the
>psychometricians are quacks?
forget your primary source..?
well if you insist..
so we are left with a set of pseudo random quotations from sundry
outdated text books..
what are we to make of it them?
>
>>
>>>
>>>>Its only merit is as a classic example for students of social research
>>>>of alreadying having your counclusions and rummaging around for data
>>>>to fit them..
>>>
>>>Actually, the studies embarrass you and so you condemn them without
>>>rationale.
>>
>>this grotesque presentation says absolutely nothing in regard to any
>>of these studies quoted in the service of racist ideology..
>
>That's because they aren't racist, duh.
really
The "christian" party arent racist?
keen fighters for equal opportunity are they then?
>>
>>
>>>>--
>>>>"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
>>>> finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
>>>> first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
>>>> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
>>>> human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
>>>> that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
>>>> international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
>>>>never attained."
>>>>
>>>>Haile Sellassie
>>>
>>>Wait a minute. Color-blindness is no longer in vogue. Excessive
>>>race-consciousness is. Second-class citizens? You mean whites who
>>>are subject to affirmative action, I presume.
>>
>>what part of
>>
>>"until the color of a man's
>> skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes"
>>do you fail to understand?
>
>Don't tell it to me, Rastus; tell it to the blacks who want
>preferential treatment for the color of their skin.
uppity huh?
racism is ugly in any color..
"Rastus " seems to tell us all we need to know about your
motivations..and mantras about "psychometrics"..
thats real lame..you can do better han that..
--
"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an
invisible government owing no allegiance and
acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To
destroy this invisible government, to befoul the
unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt
politics is the first task of the statesmanship of
today."
- Theodore Roosevelt, 19 April 1906