Another lie debunked-Africans did nothing before the white man

[Paul Essien]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

I'll say this again

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persist with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

These are FACTS. You, on the other hand, posted a RANT.

fact
[fakt]
NOUN
facts (plural noun)

1. a thing that is known or proved to be true.
   "he ignores some historical and economic facts" · "a body of fact"
   synonyms:
   reality · actuality · certainty · factuality · certitude · truth · naked truth · verity · gospel
   antonyms:
   lie · fiction
   • (facts)
     information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
     "even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts"
     synonyms:
     detail · piece of information · particular · item · specific · element · point · factor · feature · characteristic · respect · ingredient · attribute · circumstance · consideration · aspect · facet · information · itemized information · whole story · info · lowdown · score · dope · gen
   • law
     the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.
     "there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter"

###

rant
[rant]
VERB
rants (third person present) · ranted (past tense) · ranted (past participle) · ranting (present participle)

1. speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
   "she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all"
   synonyms:
   hold forth · go on and on · deliver a tirade · rant and rave · fulminate · sound off · spout · pontificate · trumpet · bluster · declaim · shout · yell · roar · bellow · mouth off · vociferate

NOUN
rants (plural noun)

1. a spell of ranting; a tirade.
   "his rants against organized religion"
   synonyms:
   tirade · harangue · diatribe · broadside · verbal onslaught · philippic

Don't blame me if you don't like the FACTS. That sounds like a personal problem.

I'm not ranting. That's just your attempt at trying to come across as the neutral sober minded one. And notice the difference the way I debate.

I attack your message, not the messenger.

 

[Vastator]

In no way the to the same extent. Check out the Belgian Congo sometime ding dong. That was the absolute worst and that is why it is so screwed up today along with continued rape by outside countries....

.....the blacks did the same thing..the NAs might not have murdered as many because they didn't have the technology to do so [ might not ] but they did the same thing--you can't measure evil.....hahahahha
...the Hutus murdered more faster per capita than the Germans at the Holocaust ..since they used Medieval weapons/etc, more Hutus had to participate per capita
..freakin bullshit
--MURDERING 200,000 is the SAME evil as murdering 500,000/etc etc

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

When an "african" american talks about advanced civilizations in ancient Africa they are specifically thinking black civilization.

The Kush, The Mali, The Ethiopean, The Zimabawe, the Karen Bono, the Kilwa, and Marina were all Sub-Saharan empires.

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Total crock of shit...Whites have lowered the prevalence of disease, and provided cures, educated as to the methods of sanitation, and increased its prevalence, lowered illiteracy rates exponentially and nearly eradicated “starvation” through outright feeding these fuckers, and showing them how to provide for themselves. If they lack in any of these regards; that falls fully on them, and their inability to maintain such social comforts. And that inability always points squarely back to their mean IQ being rock bottom amongst the human races.

 

[toobfreak]

It's 2019 and in 2 months it will be 2020. It's time to end beliefs from the 1700's.This is from Henry Louis Gates. You know, the guy you racists love to quote in order to talk about black slaveowners.

Almost all of the sub-Saharan continent was in the paleolithic age before colonization.

To be sure, sub-Saharan Africa was a rich and thriving culture and society when the Spaniards and Portuguese found them. Congo, Angola and others. They had a rich and well-established society complete with a very robust slave culture. Slaves were anyone they captured from other nations in war. When the Europeans arrived with things to trade, the one best thing the African countries had to trade was slave labor and the Europeans were interested in them for developing their sugar cane market. Africa had no problem with that until the Portuguese started taking just anyone as slave labor and the Congolese had a problem with that and said: "Whoa! You're taking the wrong people! You are taking OUR citizens!"

Of course it was too late. To the Portuguese, an African was an African. Europeans might not have invented slave labor but they certainly did capitalize on it.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

.....the blacks did the same thing..the NAs might not have murdered as many because they didn't have the technology to do so [ might not ] but they did the same thing--you can't measure evil.....hahahahha
...the Hutus murdered more faster per capita than the Germans at the Holocaust ..since they used Medieval weapons/etc, more Hutus had to participate per capita
..freakin bullshit
--MURDERING 200,000 is the SAME evil as murdering 500,000/etc etc

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

The Kush, The Mali, The Ethiopean, The Zimabawe, the Karen Bono, the Kilwa, and Marina were all Sub-Saharan empires.

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Define wrecked. If you are describing a nice pastoral existence with no roads railroads or major cities, then, ok. If you are describing the modern society that you enjoy, then, no...you are quite simply fill of shit.

I would suggest wrecked in the sense of treating African countries as colonies to be exploited for their resources.

Ownership of assets and lands stolen. Lack of infrastructure, for example training local people skilled jobs. Lack of investment in building democratic structures. Excluding Africans from positions of responsibility, such as political power and the judiciary and so on. Failure to invest the profits from African assets in making improvements to the improvement of African countries and so on.

You could probably come up with a 100 better examples.

The things that help nations to grow are trade, money, stability and their institutions. When all the wealth in Africa is funneled back to Europe it has a double whammy effect.

Firstly it widens the wealth gap by making Europe richer. And the flipside of that is that it impoverishes the African nations that are being fleeced.

In Europe we pay taxes on economic activity and we get back roads,bridges,sanitation, defence, schools and hospitals. Our legal and political structures are supported by this.

In Africa that wasnt the case. Whilst the west was building roads and railways Africa was not afforded that pleasure. Victorian Britain pretty much invented modern sanitation but a century later countries that they ruled did not have the same when granted their independence.

Africa is still dealing with the legacy of colonial rule and is playing catch up.

 

[Paul Essien]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

 

[westwall]

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Define wrecked. If you are describing a nice pastoral existence with no roads railroads or major cities, then, ok. If you are describing the modern society that you enjoy, then, no...you are quite simply fill of shit.

I would suggest wrecked in the sense of treating African countries as colonies to be exploited for their resources.

Ownership of assets and lands stolen. Lack of infrastructure, for example training local people skilled jobs. Lack of investment in building democratic structures. Excluding Africans from positions of responsibility, such as political power and the judiciary and so on. Failure to invest the profits from African assets in making improvements to the improvement of African countries and so on.

You could probably come up with a 100 better examples.

The things that help nations to grow are trade, money, stability and their institutions. When all the wealth in Africa is funneled back to Europe it has a double whammy effect.

Firstly it widens the wealth gap by making Europe richer. And the flipside of that is that it impoverishes the African nations that are being fleeced.

In Europe we pay taxes on economic activity and we get back roads,bridges,sanitation, defence, schools and hospitals. Our legal and political structures are supported by this.

In Africa that wasnt the case. Whilst the west was building roads and railways Africa was not afforded that pleasure. Victorian Britain pretty much invented modern sanitation but a century later countries that they ruled did not have the same when granted their independence.

Africa is still dealing with the legacy of colonial rule and is playing catch up.

You are correct in some cases, but woefully misinformed in others. With rare exception the reason why black populations are in such poor condition is because of their black leaders.

In my years working in Africa it was very apparent that the ruling class wanted to keep the citizens uneducated. I trained many locals because I had to. Invariably the ruling class got mad at me for doing so. In one case I took my entire crew, and their families with me when the job was finished. Fortunately Botswana welcomed them in.

One of the reasons why I like Botswana as much as I do.

 

[Meathead]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

 

[Markle]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

I'll say this again

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persist with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

These are FACTS. You, on the other hand, posted a RANT.

fact
[fakt]
NOUN
facts (plural noun)

1. a thing that is known or proved to be true.
   "he ignores some historical and economic facts" · "a body of fact"
   synonyms:
   reality · actuality · certainty · factuality · certitude · truth · naked truth · verity · gospel
   antonyms:
   lie · fiction
   • (facts)
     information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
     "even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts"
     synonyms:
     detail · piece of information · particular · item · specific · element · point · factor · feature · characteristic · respect · ingredient · attribute · circumstance · consideration · aspect · facet · information · itemized information · whole story · info · lowdown · score · dope · gen
   • law
     the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.
     "there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter"

###

rant
[rant]
VERB
rants (third person present) · ranted (past tense) · ranted (past participle) · ranting (present participle)

1. speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
   "she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all"
   synonyms:
   hold forth · go on and on · deliver a tirade · rant and rave · fulminate · sound off · spout · pontificate · trumpet · bluster · declaim · shout · yell · roar · bellow · mouth off · vociferate

NOUN
rants (plural noun)

1. a spell of ranting; a tirade.
   "his rants against organized religion"
   synonyms:
   tirade · harangue · diatribe · broadside · verbal onslaught · philippic

Don't blame me if you don't like the FACTS. That sounds like a personal problem.

I'm not ranting. That's just your attempt at trying to come across as the neutral sober minded one. And notice the difference the way I debate.

I attack your message, not the messenger.

I knew you were not capable of writing that rant. Guess what I found using a plagiarizing detection service? Entering only a small portion of "your" rant.

Begone!

 

[beautress]

In no way the to the same extent. Check out the Belgian Congo sometime ding dong. That was the absolute worst and that is why it is so screwed up today along with continued rape by outside countries....

.....the blacks did the same thing..the NAs might not have murdered as many because they didn't have the technology to do so [ might not ] but they did the same thing--you can't measure evil.....hahahahha
...the Hutus murdered more faster per capita than the Germans at the Holocaust ..since they used Medieval weapons/etc, more Hutus had to participate per capita
..freakin bullshit
--MURDERING 200,000 is the SAME evil as murdering 500,000/etc etc

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

When an "african" american talks about advanced civilizations in ancient Africa they are specifically thinking black civilization.

The Kush, The Mali, The Ethiopean, The Zimabawe, the Karen Bono, the Kilwa, and Marina were all Sub-Saharan empires.

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Look at the destroyer in your own avie, frankie dearest.

 

[impuretrash]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

I'll say this again

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persist with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

These are FACTS. You, on the other hand, posted a RANT.

fact
[fakt]
NOUN
facts (plural noun)

1. a thing that is known or proved to be true.
   "he ignores some historical and economic facts" · "a body of fact"
   synonyms:
   reality · actuality · certainty · factuality · certitude · truth · naked truth · verity · gospel
   antonyms:
   lie · fiction
   • (facts)
     information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
     "even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts"
     synonyms:
     detail · piece of information · particular · item · specific · element · point · factor · feature · characteristic · respect · ingredient · attribute · circumstance · consideration · aspect · facet · information · itemized information · whole story · info · lowdown · score · dope · gen
   • law
     the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.
     "there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter"

###

rant
[rant]
VERB
rants (third person present) · ranted (past tense) · ranted (past participle) · ranting (present participle)

1. speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
   "she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all"
   synonyms:
   hold forth · go on and on · deliver a tirade · rant and rave · fulminate · sound off · spout · pontificate · trumpet · bluster · declaim · shout · yell · roar · bellow · mouth off · vociferate

NOUN
rants (plural noun)

1. a spell of ranting; a tirade.
   "his rants against organized religion"
   synonyms:
   tirade · harangue · diatribe · broadside · verbal onslaught · philippic

Don't blame me if you don't like the FACTS. That sounds like a personal problem.

I'm not ranting. That's just your attempt at trying to come across as the neutral sober minded one. And notice the difference the way I debate.

I attack your message, not the messenger.

I knew you were not capable of writing that rant. Guess what I found using a plagiarizing detection service? Entering only a small portion of "your" rant.

Begone!

He's been littering the internet at large with his copy pasted rants and fake persona for at least a decade now.

 

[francoHFW]

.....plain and simple--sub-Saharan Africa was and still is far behind the white countries --this is undeniable
not hate--but fact

The original civilizations that gave birth to 'white culture' were African and Middle Eastern.

yes--I know that ---anyone who does any reading of world history/evolution/etc knows that

and your point is???!!
sub-Sahara Africa was and still is far behind the white regions --UNDENIABLE

After the place was absolutely ruined by white slave traders and colonialists, dingbat.

 

[francoHFW]

.....the blacks did the same thing..the NAs might not have murdered as many because they didn't have the technology to do so [ might not ] but they did the same thing--you can't measure evil.....hahahahha
...the Hutus murdered more faster per capita than the Germans at the Holocaust ..since they used Medieval weapons/etc, more Hutus had to participate per capita
..freakin bullshit
--MURDERING 200,000 is the SAME evil as murdering 500,000/etc etc

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

The Kush, The Mali, The Ethiopean, The Zimabawe, the Karen Bono, the Kilwa, and Marina were all Sub-Saharan empires.

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Look at the destroyer in your own avie, frankie dearest.

Destroyer? LOL That is the HMS Warspite the most decorated ship in the history of the royal Navy. Google that dingbat. When I was two and a half, the wreck of the warspite was 300 yards away from our hotel. It did not go softly into the night LOL. Amazing stories everywhere you look....

 

[francoHFW]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

Actually a manifestation of a****** racists like you and the incredible discrimination they have to suffer through at the hands of idiots. Not to mention how whites have destroyed their homelands. Like all of your political scandals there is no evidence behind your assertions. Just ridiculous idiocy....

 

[francoHFW]

.....the blacks did the same thing..the NAs might not have murdered as many because they didn't have the technology to do so [ might not ] but they did the same thing--you can't measure evil.....hahahahha
...the Hutus murdered more faster per capita than the Germans at the Holocaust ..since they used Medieval weapons/etc, more Hutus had to participate per capita
..freakin bullshit
--MURDERING 200,000 is the SAME evil as murdering 500,000/etc etc

Another great job of mapping borders by Europeans LOL...

The Kush, The Mali, The Ethiopean, The Zimabawe, the Karen Bono, the Kilwa, and Marina were all Sub-Saharan empires.

Ok but black people in America want to take credit for ancient Egypt and the muslim military incursions into Europe when they taught white people how to bathe.

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Total crock of shit...Whites have lowered the prevalence of disease, and provided cures, educated as to the methods of sanitation, and increased its prevalence, lowered illiteracy rates exponentially and nearly eradicated “starvation” through outright feeding these fuckers, and showing them how to provide for themselves. If they lack in any of these regards; that falls fully on them, and their inability to maintain such social comforts. And that inability always points squarely back to their mean IQ being rock bottom amongst the human races.

they have improved it only in comparison to the absolute wreck they left behind as colonialists. Brainwashed functional racist Idiot. Google sub-Saharan African empires and learn something for a change dip s***....

 

[Meathead]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

Actually a manifestation of a****** racists like you and the incredible discrimination they have to suffer through at the hands of idiots. Not to mention how whites have destroyed their homelands. Like all of your political scandals there is no evidence behind your assertions. Just ridiculous idiocy....

I rarely engage the likes of you except to ridicule. But seriously, show me someplace where blacks are not the lowest rung of the ladder.

 

[francoHFW]

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Define wrecked. If you are describing a nice pastoral existence with no roads railroads or major cities, then, ok. If you are describing the modern society that you enjoy, then, no...you are quite simply fill of shit.

I would suggest wrecked in the sense of treating African countries as colonies to be exploited for their resources.

Ownership of assets and lands stolen. Lack of infrastructure, for example training local people skilled jobs. Lack of investment in building democratic structures. Excluding Africans from positions of responsibility, such as political power and the judiciary and so on. Failure to invest the profits from African assets in making improvements to the improvement of African countries and so on.

You could probably come up with a 100 better examples.

The things that help nations to grow are trade, money, stability and their institutions. When all the wealth in Africa is funneled back to Europe it has a double whammy effect.

Firstly it widens the wealth gap by making Europe richer. And the flipside of that is that it impoverishes the African nations that are being fleeced.

In Europe we pay taxes on economic activity and we get back roads,bridges,sanitation, defence, schools and hospitals. Our legal and political structures are supported by this.

In Africa that wasnt the case. Whilst the west was building roads and railways Africa was not afforded that pleasure. Victorian Britain pretty much invented modern sanitation but a century later countries that they ruled did not have the same when granted their independence.

Africa is still dealing with the legacy of colonial rule and is playing catch up.

You are correct in some cases, but woefully misinformed in others. With rare exception the reason why black populations are in such poor condition is because of their black leaders.

In my years working in Africa it was very apparent that the ruling class wanted to keep the citizens uneducated. I trained many locals because I had to. Invariably the ruling class got mad at me for doing so. In one case I took my entire crew, and their families with me when the job was finished. Fortunately Botswana welcomed them in.

One of the reasons why I like Botswana as much as I do.

Yep the place is a wreck. Thanks white people! Slave traders ruined the morality of the rulers and then just wrecked the place with a huge slave trade and later ruthless colonialism... The corrupt rulers these days do it for the money so many places. You're right the place is a mess. And nobody is doing much to help them. Many thanks to the GOP for the 2008 World economic meltdown. If you're wondering why there are so many blacks coming to Libya on the way to Europe.... Not everybody had 8 trillion dollars to avert the worst like the EU and the United States under Obama. Thank God at least the Democrats got in immediately and did not allow the Republicans almost 4 years to do their usual nothing for the regular people after they wrecked the world economy like 1929.....

 

[francoHFW]

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

Actually a manifestation of a****** racists like you and the incredible discrimination they have to suffer through at the hands of idiots. Not to mention how whites have destroyed their homelands. Like all of your political scandals there is no evidence behind your assertions. Just ridiculous idiocy....

I rarely engage the likes of you except to ridicule. But seriously, show me someplace where blacks are not the lowest rung of the ladder.

Ghana and any other African states with honest rulers. So do you think Bill and Hillary are pedophiles? And discrimination against blacks does not exist in America? Idiot.

 

[Meathead]

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

Actually a manifestation of a****** racists like you and the incredible discrimination they have to suffer through at the hands of idiots. Not to mention how whites have destroyed their homelands. Like all of your political scandals there is no evidence behind your assertions. Just ridiculous idiocy....

I rarely engage the likes of you except to ridicule. But seriously, show me someplace where blacks are not the lowest rung of the ladder.

Ghana and any other African states with honest rulers. So do you think Bill and Hillary are pedophiles? And discrimination against blacks does not exist in America? Idiot.

Except for SA, where in black Africa could blacks possibly be second-class?

Idiot!

 

[Tommy Tainant]

A black man built the biggest public bath in Rome. It was named after him. He was also the Roman Emperor. One of several Black Emperors.
How could an African reach such a prominent position in the cradle of western civilisation ?

irrelevant---so what??!!
Africa is still a shithole with the worst disease/sanitation/illiteracy/starvation/etc etc

But it wasn't before the whites wrecked the place.

Define wrecked. If you are describing a nice pastoral existence with no roads railroads or major cities, then, ok. If you are describing the modern society that you enjoy, then, no...you are quite simply fill of shit.

I would suggest wrecked in the sense of treating African countries as colonies to be exploited for their resources.

Ownership of assets and lands stolen. Lack of infrastructure, for example training local people skilled jobs. Lack of investment in building democratic structures. Excluding Africans from positions of responsibility, such as political power and the judiciary and so on. Failure to invest the profits from African assets in making improvements to the improvement of African countries and so on.

You could probably come up with a 100 better examples.

The things that help nations to grow are trade, money, stability and their institutions. When all the wealth in Africa is funneled back to Europe it has a double whammy effect.

Firstly it widens the wealth gap by making Europe richer. And the flipside of that is that it impoverishes the African nations that are being fleeced.

In Europe we pay taxes on economic activity and we get back roads,bridges,sanitation, defence, schools and hospitals. Our legal and political structures are supported by this.

In Africa that wasnt the case. Whilst the west was building roads and railways Africa was not afforded that pleasure. Victorian Britain pretty much invented modern sanitation but a century later countries that they ruled did not have the same when granted their independence.

Africa is still dealing with the legacy of colonial rule and is playing catch up.

You are correct in some cases, but woefully misinformed in others. With rare exception the reason why black populations are in such poor condition is because of their black leaders.

In my years working in Africa it was very apparent that the ruling class wanted to keep the citizens uneducated. I trained many locals because I had to. Invariably the ruling class got mad at me for doing so. In one case I took my entire crew, and their families with me when the job was finished. Fortunately Botswana welcomed them in.

One of the reasons why I like Botswana as much as I do.

You can see from the US what happens to people when they are oppressed for a few centuries. That is going to take time to resolve.

The quality of African leaders isnt great but I am told that the last US President was a cross dressing muslim traitor married to a man with bogus children. Another Pres was a sex crazed rapist who headed a crime family and committed multiple murders whilst filling his own pockets.

The reason governance was poor is that it was not developed naturally over time. Again the fault of people who dumped them in it.

 

[Paul Essien]

I presented facts, all relevant to what I posted and the FACTS I provided were in context, they included the entire study.

There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.

Let me explain to you what a fact is

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

Why ? Because there’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.

But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.

In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.

Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)

In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.

Why is that ?

Alfred Binet created IQ test’s to see which children weren’t profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.

I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.

But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,

Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.

In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.

No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.

The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.

Which are those “races” then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?

Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.

Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.

Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?

What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.

So your superior to blk men ?