Blog Archive

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Blacks Aren’t Human

Blacks Aren’t Human
January 29th, 2009

According to Rushton’s “Race, Evolution, and Behavior” fully modern homo sapiens emerged in Africa 200,000 years ago. 100,000 years ago, a small group of Africans had a sudden urge to head north. This small group inhabited the rest of the world, with minimal contact with the rest of the Africans who stayed in Africa. 40,000 years ago, the Caucasoid race broke off from the Mongoloid race.

This means the entire world outside of Africa is largely related, descended from one small tribe of perhaps a few hundred or a thousand. This tribe was obviously already unique, in that it alone had the intrepidity and determination to head north and conquer the world. We, the descendants of this unique tribe, have afterwards been evolving under extremely different, more challenging environments for the last 100,000 years apart from the African race we left behind. 100,000 years under dramatically different environments from a dramatically different founding stock is a long time. Compare it to dogs:

http://archaeology.about.com/od/domestications/qt/dogs.htm

“Dog history has been studied recently using mitochondrial DNA, which suggests that wolves and dogs split into different species around 100,000 years ago;

Another recent study suggests that the entire population of dogs today are descended from three females near China about 15,000 years ago

So, I’m going to stick my neck out and use the 13,000 year BC date as the probable date of domestication.”

This is a convenient parallel. Dogs also come from a bottleneck, they’ve also been genetically separate from wolves for 100,000 years, and they’ve also undergone different environmental pressures than their wolf counterparts. Just as the northern latitudes presented a unique environment for non-blacks to grow up in, dogs were domesticated and evolved towards suiting human needs instead of wolf needs. No one on earth says dogs and wolves are the same species, even though it is possible for dogs to mate with wolves and have fertile offspring. The genetic differences are vast enough, the phenotypic differences in looks, behavior, and personality are great enough, that everyone instinctively recognizes dogs and wolves are different species now.

Why then are blacks considered human? Why are blacks and non-blacks considered part of the same species? We could not look more different, act more different, or have more different personalities than them. There is a vast genetic divergence between blacks and non-blacks dating back 100,000 years. And even though blacks and non-blacks can have fertile offspring, biologically that has never been used as the exclusive standard for whether you belong to the same species or not.

Phenotypic Variations between Blacks and Non-blacks:

Blacks have wide noses, kinky hair, black skin, high waist-to-hip ratios, prognathic jaws, long arms, and soulless, vacant eyes. Everything about them is ugly.

Blacks have the lowest IQ in the world. (ignoring the equally disgusting and black-skinned australian aborigines for convenience’s sake.) The bushmen clock in at around 50 IQ, the average bantu achieves the mentally retarded level of 70 IQ, and the highly cultivated, well fed, well cared for, partially white African-Americans reach 85 IQ. IQ has an enormous impact on lifestyle, achievement, and behavior. IQ correlates to poverty, crime, mortality, and broken homes on one side — and education, wealth, human accomplishment, long life and stable homes on the other. According to “IQ and the Wealth of Nations,” a country must have a minimum average IQ of 90 to run a technological civilization. It is not a far cry to say it is IQ that makes humans better than the animals, and it is IQ that makes some humans better than other humans.

That’s not all though. Blacks are unique in that when we arrived, they had no written language, no wheel, no architectural works, nothing at all that would indicate they live a human existence. Whereas literature and palaces and cities existed in almost every corner of the earth, from the Incas to the Indians to the Persians to the Chinese to Stonehenge to Ankar Wat in Cambodia — nothing existed in Africa. For the past 100,000 years non-blacks have been spreading across the globe, building pyramids and cities, developing new technology, domesticating animals and crops, covering themselves in finely decorated clothing, and living essentially human lives. Blacks, meanwhile, stayed nearly naked, self-mutilating, technology-less, with no domesticated animals, no written language, no wheel, no stone buildings, no metalworking, nothing.

Virtually every other non-black group came up with an admirable or at least interesting religion or philosophy which was recorded and taught to a priesthood. Indians had the Vedas and the Upanishads, Chinese had Confucianism, Daoism, and various sects of Buddhism. Europeans had Virgil, Horace, and Homer to write down their pagan religion, with Plato, Aristotle, and numberless other greats to record their philosophy. Even the Aztecs had a corpus of literature which was, unfortunately, burnt and destroyed by the Spanish invaders. Shintoism was developed in Japan, the epic of Gilgamesh was recorded in ancient Babylonian times, and Egypt authored the Book of the Dead. Only black Africa (and assorted primitives in australasia) hadn’t recorded or created any official religion or philosophy. Blacks still rely on voodoo, witchcraft, black magic, and animism with no particular pantheon of Gods, no priesthood, no anything that could develop them past superstition and barbarism.

Today it is questionable what Blacks could achieve on their own, without the intervention of others giving to them all the things they could never produce or maintain themselves. Though we see blacks walking around in business suits, speaking English, shooting guns, and making use of all sorts of non-black generated goods and services and inventions and ideas and discoveries — none of them originate from the black man. Without the continuous intervention of charity into Black Africa, it’s unknown whether they could even maintain what they have, or if they would simply regress back to mud huts the moment we left. All current black civilization is in fact transplanted non-black civilization. There is not as yet a single black civilization on Earth that has independently developed and maintained its own technological and philosophical way of life. No blacks have won any nobel prizes in the hard sciences, fields medals, or gotten any spot on a list of Human Accomplishment that would represent some major scientific or technological advancement for the world.

Geography can be no excuse, because blacks today live all across the world. Blacks in France, the UK, and the USA are given preferential treatment and access to college educations, and yet they still produce nothing. At the same time, whites who lived in South Africa and Zimbabwe made them into decent, first world nations without a problem. There is nothing about the African continent inimical to modern life, it is simply the fact that it is populated by blacks.

Nor can some strange combination of bad luck and being separate from other civilizations explain black underperformance. After all, blacks have been connected to the outside world since the 1400’s. They have had centuries to modernize and improve themselves in Africa with full access to modern knowledge and technology. In contrast, it took Japan about twenty years to modernize from a feudal samurai culture to a fully modern industrial state which then took on and defeated Russia in 1900. Blacks have had centuries in the USA to do all sorts of human activities, immersed in white culture, knowledge, and technology. Instead all they do is riot, rape, steal, sell drugs, and demand more handouts from the government. Germany recovered from WWII in just ten years, becoming yet again a prosperous, powerful, and leading-edge modern civilization. Africans meanwhile cannot recover from ‘colonization,’ ’slavery,’ or ‘discrimination’ after centuries. Haiti has been an all-black, independent, free state since the Napoleonic wars, 200 years ago. Even so, its lifestyle and standard of living perfectly matches that of darkest Africa. In those 200 years it hasn’t progressed an inch. In fact it has probably regressed since that time. Their neighbors in the dominican republic have immensely better statistics than them in all fields. Instead of a failed state, the dominican republic takes care of its people, has a working government, and doesn’t need charity. The difference? Their population is non-black. All of the old, tired excuses are refuted by geography and history.

The black murder rate is 9 times that of the white/hispanic (combined!) murder rate. It is 36 times as high as the asian murder rate. Blacks are the majority of AIDS cases and all other STDs, their STD rates are completely out of proportion to all other groups. Even homosexuals have a hard time keeping up with the black STD rates. No ordinary healthy human has the sexual habits of the black race. Whereas every other people on earth developed a family structure, blacks still roam around aimlessly screwing everyone they meet and never staying to raise the child. 70% of black children in the USA are illegitimate. In Africa, women largely do all the work and raise the kids while the men commit crime or sit around chewing leaves or smoking something. Domestic violence among blacks is atrocious. Rape is endemic. The human race does not act like this, their morals and habits are completely different.

Good things can be said of virtually every group or civilization on earth. This is unsurprising, given the fact that everyone on earth is descended from the same small tribe that left africa 100,000 years ago. East Asians are such decent, advanced people they are comparable to whites. Unsurprisingly, they only diverged from the White race 40,000 years ago. There is only one group nothing good can be said about, there is only one group completely unrelated to the rest of the human race, and that is the black African. There is enough genetic variation between blacks and non-blacks that any objective scientist, classifying us like they would classify various animal species, would label us different species. On one side humans, on the other blacks. There is enough phenotypic, common sense variation, that again it is an insult to categorize blacks among the human race. They are nothing like us and they never will be, they are worse in every way. Call them orcs, or trolls, devils, or whatever you like–they are not human.

* * *

(P.S.  In response to various opposing views, I wrote a few follow up posts addressing specific issues they didn't seem to understand from the initial post.  Here are the appropriate links to follow-up on this conversation: http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2012/03/black-crime.html, http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2012/05/big-question-concerning-crime.html , http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2011/11/importance-of-indigenous-accomplishment.html, http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2011/11/unimportance-of-individual.html, http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2011/01/superior-should-supplant-inferior-but.html, http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2013/08/black-world.html,http://diamed-the-road-less-traveled.blogspot.com/2015/02/black-world-coming-to-theaters-near-you.html)

622 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 622   Newer›   Newest»
Diamed said...

Right, so, the female black widow spider immorally kills their mating partner because of their bad upbringing from their mothers, not because they have an inborn instinct to do so. . .

Anonymous said...

Blacks everywhere in America create a higher crime rate because they're all suffering from a bad upbringing I guess.

Their animal genes are to blame for their primitive behavior, I guess. Maybe it's their stupidity gene, their rape gene, their screeching gene, their loudmouth gene, their thievery gene, their violence gene, their race card gene. It all adds up to them being animals, really. If we put human expectations and responsibilities on the backwards negroloids, we're bound to cry ourselves to sleep when we see the carnage these lower life forms leave in their wake.

Giving a black any responsibility that you would give to a human is like leaving your children under the care of a pedophile, or like leaving your pets under the care of an alligator. You will be heartbroken in the end. Face it. They're not human.

- The realist

Miville said...

I agree with all the facts you are listing. But I maintain that Blacks are human, despite the big genetic differences and also their inability to create or maintain modern-style civilizations. What makes them human is the ability for any human worthy of that name to talk with them on many subjects fruitfully and interestingly. They have left no great philosopher worthy of that name in encyclopedias, probably they never will, with the exception of Credo Mutwa and his multitudinous ilk, but I found it easier to have serious philosophical conversations among Black HaItians than among other more endowed groups. They are humans, and more human maybe than many others, in the sense that they suffer more heavily from the original sin. They are not to be compared to chimps : they are too helpless and behave too badly to be compared to monkeys. Monkeys are more specialized than humans, and also more cunning with their realm of action, whereas Blacks are very little specialized in terms of any efficiency compared let us say to East Asians. By the way, in India some yogis like Jyoti Raju do strive to behave like monkeys, and are even adopted into monkey families, precisely to become more cunning and clever, to raise their IQ, in the same way others are visualizing themselves into elephants to develop their memory. So ascribing to monkey-ness the lower IQ of many Blacks is utterly pointless.

I for one think that in the greater organism of humanity Blacks are genetically programmed to destroy and simplify systems that have outlived their usefulness (on the cosmic plane), in the same way Whites are programmed to build and introduce new ones, and Asians to maintain and refine them without really inventing. Blacks do tend to bring back societies to underdevelopment and primitiveness, out of an instinct which is not evil per se at all, but rather a quest for beauty and ecstasy, which shows in their favorite music and painting, for instance. Depending on the destruction process is done with love and consciousness or not (and that is linked to God's grace, not to any human ability, genetic or not), it will lead back to earthly paradise or to mere swamps, in the same way construction and invention can lead both to Athens or to Gulags. It is no use comparing African music to Beethoven and Chopin for most Whites at the time of Beethoven and Chopin rather played the military kind of music that was later played by the nazis, and romantic musicians were never loved by their fellow Whites.

I am white but I spent most of my life in Haiti or Haitian ghettos just to be together with the greater number of friends I could have interesting conversations with. Most PCs say they are not racist and oppose all forms of discrimination, push for racial integration everywhere, except in their own backyard. I am the very reverse thing. I am profoundly racist, but I appreciate being surrounded by Blacks provided they are not delinquents.

Anonymous said...

The Yanomami (tribe in South America) are a very primitive non-African people.

Anonymous said...

"Recently a Japanese scientist working out of the University of London made a rather offhand, statistically backed study showing black women were the least attractive women on Earth. He was fired almost immediately after, though there was no attempt to refute or disprove his point."

He was fired because he said they were "objectively" less attractive than other races. IIRC

Diamed said...

Yes, because they are. Objectively.

That's why I said: "statistically backed study." Not, 'made a random personal statement.'

Black women are objectively the ugliest women on Earth. We can reach this conclusion because men, when surveyed, on average, find them to be the least attractive women on Earth. Even black men find them to be far less attractive than white women.

Furthermore, the dating habits between races reveal that black women are the ugliest on Earth. Black women cannot find any attention from outside their race, whereas white and Asian women are hot commodities for men of all races.

Furthermore, the fact that black women don't sell well on the covers of magazines, as models, or any other attractiveness-based industry, shows they must be objectively uglier than other women.

Furthermore, the fact that black women spend endless amounts of money enhancing their looks through skin bleaching and hair straightening, just to look a little more like whites, proves they are objectively uglier.

Furthermore, the fact that the rated prettiest black women, like Halle Berry, are practically white women, proves that black women are objectively ugly and the best they can do is look like pseudo-whites.

He was fired for stating an objective truth, as an objective truth. There is no doubt as to black women's ugliness. They're just plain ugly. But in today's world, you can no longer say this and keep a job.

Anonymous said...

Yes, and let's never forget that Obama's butt-ugly wife won some laughable political suck-up award for looking so beautiful, when she's objectively so ugly that Joe Frazier could roll her head in flour and make gorilla cookies.

- The Realist

Tek_Knowledge said...

Unfortunately, I have a very long response that I'm going to have to break down

into bits...not spamming, just warning. And yes, negroes can write html.






Sigh, some things that were said here were very hurtful, but hey, this is the type

of behavior I have come to expect from white people (and their non-white Europhile

slaves, including other black people). My questions are at the end, and I highly

encourage you to attempt to answer my questions.








First, as a black male, victim of white supremacy, I must commend you sir for having

to courage to say what I suspect so many whites think of me and all that look like

me (and other non-whites, as indicated in the comments). I wish more white people

would have the fortitude to say how they really feel about non-white people, so we

understand that the solution to the "race" problem is the complete separation

between members of the "white race" and people who are not white.







That is not to say that I hate white people, or even that all white people are

racist, but since most science admits that "race" is a farce, I have to be

suspicious of every member of the white race...what other reason is there to be a

member of a race but to practice racism?







Second, I've noticed this chimpout/niggermania style of practicing racism

lately...Where all "non-blacks" (whatever that means) gang up on "blacks" (again,

whatever that means). I would just like to point out that this is the same blatant

divide and conquer deception that has been practiced for years by whites where they

have non-whites bashing other non-whites. The goal of this racist practice, "humans"

vs "non-humans" or w/e in my estimation is to commission other non-whites to do

whatever you want done with people classified as "black" and then pick the next

group of non-whites that you have a problem with, and they'll become "black people".

"Jihad Watch" is another site that employs such a tactic. I wish all non-whites

would drop this "Negroid" "Semite" "Indian" "Asian" nonsense and see the truth: That

the "white race" (established 1492) has and always has been a group of lying,

sadistic, terrorists.





I'll post a few rebuttals to your arguments here just for other non-white people or

non-racists just so they are not confused:

1) Wolves and dogs are the same species to my feeble Negro understanding are the same species, as

others have pointed out...


Wikipedia says:
"The domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris[3] and Canis lupus dingo[1][2]) is a

domesticated form of the gray wolf, a member of the Canidae family of the order

Carnivora. The term is used for both feral and pet varieties."

Tek_Knowledge said...

2) You said:
"Blacks have the lowest IQ in the world. (ignoring the

equally disgusting and black-skinned australian aborigines for convenience’s sake.)

The bushmen clock in at around 50 IQ, the average bantu achieves the mentally

retarded level of 70 IQ, and the highly cultivated, well fed, well cared for,

partially white African-Americans reach 85 IQ."



You try to sound so "objective", but your bias is dripping throughout this

statement. You correlate "black skin" with "disgusting" but try to decieve and say

that your attitude towards black Africans has nothing to do with skin color (later

in the comments you also admit that you have a problem with "South Asians", who also

tend to be "Black Skinned"). And since we're talking about IQs, why don't we examine

the Spanish, Portugese, and Argentines, who all have an average IQ around 90 (only 5

points higher than Aframs). There are other groups with measured IQs around 70-80 as

well (Mexicans and Indians). Not throwing these groups under the bus (I don't even

think IQ is a valid measure of "intelligence"), but I'm just exposing the fact that

you may have an agenda targeting specifically "black" people when talking about "Low

IQ".


3) You said:
"That’s not all though. Blacks are unique in that when we

arrived, they had no written language, no wheel, no architectural works, nothing at

all that would indicate they live a human existence. Whereas literature and palaces

and cities existed in almost every corner of the earth, from the Incas to the

Indians to the Persians to the Chinese to Stonehenge to Ankar Wat in Cambodia —

nothing existed in Africa."



Written Languages
- Merotic, Ga'ez, Egyptian. The West African medival cultures all had written

scripts (although most were based off of Arabic)


Wheel
- The Native Americans, Southeast Asians, and Oceanic peoples did not possess a

wheel either. Why no bashing of them? Also, not having a wheel isn't entirely

accurate. The Lower (Northern) Sudan, Ethiopia, Egypt, Libya, Morroco, and Egypt all

have documentation (from Africans and Europeans alike) that the wheel did in fact

exist in these areas.


Architectural Works
- Umm....hello, the pyramids (in both Egypt and Southern Nubia)? Great Zimbabwe? The

Mosque at Djenne in Mali? The University of Timbuktu? The Ethiopian Obliesks? And

please don't play that "Egyptians are 'Caucasian'" game with me, the ancient

Egyptians depicted themselves as lighter than Sudanese (who are the darkest people

on the planet) but way darker than Semites. They are shown with a variety of hair

textures, including braids, straight hair, dredlocks, and afros, and a variety of

skin tones (from Nubian black to modern Egyptian brown) They said themselves that

they were descended from modern day Djibouti/Somalia.



Picture of a Sahelian Fulani



Picture of Somali women

Unless you say that these people are "Caucasian" =//

Tek_Knowledge said...

4)You said:
"For the past 100,000 years non-blacks have been spreading

across the globe, building pyramids and cities, developing new technology,

domesticating animals and crops, covering themselves in finely decorated clothing,

and living essentially human lives. Blacks, meanwhile, stayed nearly naked, self-

mutilating, technology-less, with no domesticated animals, no written language, no

wheel, no stone buildings, no metalworking, nothing."



Didn't black people invent agriculture?? While Arabs were out herding camels in the

desert and Europeans were eating themselves, blacks were farming -- fact.


Sources say:

"The Fertile Crescent of Western Asia, Egypt, and India were sites of the earliest

planned sowing and harvesting of plants that had previously been gathered in the

wild. Independent development of agriculture occurred in northern and southern

China, Africa's Sahel, New Guinea and several regions of the Americas.[27] "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture#History


Metal working? Black people in Tanzania invented steel almost 1500 years before

Europeans...


Sources say:

"Steel was known in antiquity, and may have been produced by managing bloomeries,

iron-smelting facilities, where the bloom contained carbon.[17]


The earliest known production of steel is a piece of ironware excavated from an

archaeological site in Anatolia (Kaman-Kalehoyuk) and is about 4,000 years old.[18]

Other ancient steel comes from East Africa, dating back to 1400 BC.[19]"



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel

Steel was invented independently in Asia (Turkey) and Africa 4-6000 years before

Europeans invented steel.

West Africa was a huge producer of Iron in ancient times. In fact, in modern times,

Europeans employed African slaves as blacksmiths BECAUSE they were skilled

metalworkers.


5) You said:
"Virtually every other non-black group came up with an

admirable or at least interesting religion or philosophy which was recorded and

taught to a priesthood."



Umm...wasn't Ethiopia the first state to adopt Christianity as state religion? The

Ancient Egyptian religious system? Ancient Nubia? Judaism in West Africa as early as

300 AD??


6) You said:
"No blacks have won any nobel prizes in the hard

sciences, fields medals, or gotten any spot on a list of Human Accomplishment that

would represent some major scientific or technological advancement for the world."


Umm...
Dr. Ben Carson? - first neurosurgeon to seperate conjoined twins at the head?

Dr. Charles Drew? - pioneer in blood transfusions and discovered blood plasma?

Dr. Danile Hale Williams? - first open heart surgery?

Dr. Augustus A White? - a leading orthopedic surgeon?

Dr. Diop

Roland Mallet - dude

developing Time Travel





You said Nobel Prize OR major scientific advancement. So do not try to ask me for

a Nobel Prize winner, I've been to engineering school, I know what OR logically

means.


Tek_Knowledge said...

8) You said:
"Haiti has been an all-black, independent, free state

since the Napoleonic wars, 200 years ago. Even so, its lifestyle and standard of

living perfectly matches that of darkest Africa. In those 200 years it hasn’t

progressed an inch. In fact it has probably regressed since that time. Their

neighbors in the dominican republic have immensely better statistics than them in

all fields. Instead of a failed state, the dominican republic takes care of its

people, has a working government, and doesn’t need charity. The difference? Their

population is non-black."


Actually their (the DR) population is over 80% black. Just because they deny that

they are black doesn't mean that they aren't black. Actually, if they aren't

"black", then what are they then?? As for Haiti, i'm sure you're familiar with the

ridiculous amount of "reparations" that france asked for (over 400 million dollars

back THEN) AND the attempts to sabotage Haiti because white slaveowners in the US

were concerned that the Haitians may have lead an uprising in the whole western

hemisphere. You also forgot to mention that Haiti didn't gain freedom by Osmosis during Napolean's wars, they tactically outclassed the world's strongest army at the time.


9) You said:
"The black murder rate is 9 times that of the

white/hispanic (combined!) murder rate. It is 36 times as high as the asian murder

rate."



You know the interesting thing is that Russia of all places has the highest

crime and murder rates in the world, while Ghana is among the lowest. You should

probably concern yourself with your white "brothers and sisters" in Russia, since

you're part of a "race" and all.


Sources say:


"50% of all Russian businesses are tied to organized crime".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Russia


I think you should also do some research on human sex tourism and trafficking,

especially when dealing with pedophilia. You won't be surprised who you find are the

ringleaders of that operation (it ain't people of color).


10) You said:
"There is only one group nothing good can be said about,

there is only one group completely unrelated to the rest of the human race, and that

is the black African."



This is my final point. Lets assume that your point is TRUE, that "black Africans"

are inferior to the rest of humanity...


a) Does this mean that black people should be mistreated? infants are inferior to

adults, does that mean that THEY should be mistreated?


b) it seems no matter what a black person does, you invariably will have a problem

with them, whether they are a CEO of a company or the President of the United

States, they are never "enough" for you. Even if this premise were true, why should

you mistreat black people who have proven themselves capable?


c) If everything on this planet exists for a reason, why would you blame us black

people for being "inferior" through no fault of our own? If nature made us that way,

and there is no way to improve it, why mistreat us because of it? Shouldn't you be

attempting to either a) help or b) leave us alone in every way possible? I think if

blacks are really "sub-human", it says more about whites than it does about blacks

how you can treat a lifeform who are inferior through no fault of their own.


d) what should be DONE with black people?

Diamed said...

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/dr.html

Ethnic composition of the Dominican Republic according to the most reliable source imaginable, the CIA World Factbook:

mixed 73%, white 16%, black 11%

So no, the Dominican Republic is not black.

CIA World Factbook's description of Haiti's demographics?

black 95%, mulatto and white 5%

So there you go. The CIA World Factbook says Haiti is black and the Dominican Republic isn't. I stand with the CIA World Factbook.

All the 'African' accomplishments you spoke of were north African Caucasian accomplishments, not actual blacks, or blacks who had absorbed nearby cultural advances from their Caucasian neighbors, not advances they had invented themselves. We have the DNA tests of Egyptian mummies and they match the Caucasian genome, not the negroid. Egyptians weren't black, no matter how much blacks wish they were.

My Human Accomplishment list criteria is: Was listed in Charles Murray's book 'Human Accomplishment.' His book does a statistical study showing what achievements really mattered and which didn't. I'm just following his published book's, well-studied lead. Blacks didn't get a single mention in the hard sciences. Take it up with him.

Diamed said...

Russia is in a historically bad patch. It didn't used to be like this. Russia can point to a proud history and great individuals, that prove that whatever has gone wrong since the Bolshevik revolution, it doesn't mean that the Russian people are unsalvageably bad. This can't be said of blacks who have no history or achievements to point to, that would indicate they will ever improve.

All crime is deplorable, but all blacks everywhere have high crime rates, whereas only a few white countries have high crime rates for specific, local reasons. This doesn't say anything about the race as a whole.

Haiti's history is no worse than many other countries who have gone on to achieve greatness. They have had two hundred years to get their act together. Enough excuses.

It's true that recently scientists classified wolves, coyotes, foxes and god knows what as somehow the same species as dogs. Maybe they realized what a weak point it was in the Politically Correct Order if they left them different species. When I grew up they were always understood to be different species, but no matter. There are other species that serve the same rhetorical point as wolves and dogs. Just substitute in mule deer and elk or the like and my point stands.

Am I emotionally invested in my arguments? Sure. That doesn't change any of my facts.

I forget your other objections, so sorry if I missed some.

My guiding principle is that the superior should supplant the inferior, but the inferior should not supplant the superior. We can be merciful to blacks so long as they do not represent a threat to the overall health of society. Unfortunately, they currently do pose a threat, which is the reason why we must 'rally' against them.

Have you seen the majority-black cities, suburbs, or countries? They're all run-down slums. They're unlivable. The black plague is like an ecophage, or a nanoswarm, in biblical terms, they're like locusts who swarm over an area and when they're gone nothing is left standing. They are a clear and present danger to all their neighbors and the entire world.

I want to defang blacks. I want to make them cease to be a threat to the rest of the world. I wish blacks would reform themselves, but since this is impossible, as they seem incapable of feeling guilt or shame for the wreckage they make of everything they touch, at some point we will have to reform them ourselves. I want to make them behave sooner rather than later, while the damage can still be contained. You could say that's the 'plan.'

Anonymous said...

The Japanese scientist you mentioned admitted his study was flawed...

Diamed said...

Yes, because it was an offhand blog post and not intended to be a peer reviewed article for Nature. He didn't say that he was WRONG. And of course, he wasn't wrong, because all evidence supports him. The difference between being right and having fulfilled every possible parameter of a scientific experiment is vast.

Tek_Knowledge said...

All the 'African' accomplishments you spoke of were north African Caucasian accomplishments, not actual blacks, or blacks who had absorbed nearby cultural advances from their Caucasian neighbors, not advances they had invented themselves. We have the DNA tests of Egyptian mummies and they match the Caucasian genome, not the negroid. Egyptians weren't black, no matter how much blacks wish they were.

LOL, how delusional can you be? So the "Ethiopians" (greek for "of burnt skin") were not black Africans? The Nubian/Kushites (Kush means black) does not mean "black"? As for the Egyptians, again what is most credible for me, since most whites continue to lie about this, is how the Egyptians depicted themselves (dark brown skin, all types of hair textures, etc). Even Herodotus described "Libyans", "Egyptians", and "Ethiopians" of being of "black skin and wooly hair". Mansa Musa was a Caucasian? All societies are influenced by societies around them. Are you saying that the sedentary, agricultural, West African kingdoms were coached by nomadic Semites? Of course there was cultural exchange, but to point at a group of nomads and say that they influenced a group of people already involved in agriculture and industry is ridiculous. That isn't how he is drawn by the Semites and the Mandinka. How about all the way down in Ancient/Medieval Zimbabwe? Did Whites land from space and build that empire as well? Did white people beam down and develop steel in Tanzania (4000 years before they figured out how to do it for themselves)?

As far as your stats about the Dominican republic, the argument is ridiculous. Would 80-85% of Dominicans ride on the back of the bus or the front of the bus? Point blank, period. There are black Americans who are of some white, Asian, or Native American ancestry who are still classified as "black". The CIA relies on self identification to gather racial/ethnic data. The "racial" makeup of the Africans in the DR is no different than the makeup of Africans in the United States, except that their rapists were Hispanic (from Hispanola) rather than Saxon.

And who makes Dr. Charles Murray an expert on what accomplishments matter and what doesn't?

Tek_Knowledge said...

Also, i didn't feel I got satisfactory answers to most of my questions/comments. Like most white people do, you picked and chose through what I wrote that you wanted to respond to, some of my comments I addressed in the previous post. You answered question d) at the end and I appreciate your response although I would like some clarification. there is still questions a) b) and c) though.


a) Does this mean that black people should be mistreated? infants are inferior to

adults, does that mean that THEY should be mistreated?


b) it seems no matter what a black person does, you invariably will have a problem

with them, whether they are a CEO of a company or the President of the United

States, they are never "enough" for you. Even if this premise were true, why should

you mistreat black people who have proven themselves capable?


c) If everything on this planet exists for a reason, why would you blame us black

people for being "inferior" through no fault of our own? If nature made us that way,

and there is no way to improve it, why mistreat us because of it? Shouldn't you be

attempting to either a) help or b) leave us alone in every way possible? I think if

blacks are really "sub-human", it says more about whites than it does about blacks

how you can treat a lifeform who are inferior through no fault of their own.

Diamed said...

Greater Zimbabwe is due to a group of Jewish traders who sailed in and founded a colony there, mixing with the black natives. It wasn't a native black accomplishment.

Libyans are Caucasian. Tanzania made some steel? Fine, who cares? They still didn't have a written language, cities, a written down religion, or any other sign of culture. The overall cultural level is more important than any single achievement.

A) Blacks should be treated as harshly as is necessary to contain their damage to non-blacks, and no harsher. Is that mistreatment? I don't think so.

B) I have nothing against genuinely decent blacks. Maybe ten percent of blacks are decent people. I am not talking about them and have nothing against them.

C) I'm not religious, so I don't have any mystical reverence for the status quo. Many things exist in this world that shouldn't, like mosquitoes and cockroaches. Misbehaving blacks fall under that category.

Tek_Knowledge said...

Thank you for your answers sir.

Anonymous said...

"The human race does not act like this"

Human history says different. What a stupid statement...

Anonymous said...

Black widow spiders are creatures that don't possess moral behavior...

Anonymous said...

Black people aren't completely human, I knew this when I was three years old. As an adult, I have had some experiences in the workplace with niggers, and now it is so incredibly obvious how dumb they are. They can't count, they can't think past five minutes, & they are more socially inept than a 14 year old white goth boy.
At least I would trust the white kid & hire him for odd jobs, but the nigger? Forget it.

Like dad always said, "The truth hurts." Few people are even brave enough to say the truth anymore, so the op is to be commended imho, for bringing this to light. We have to talk about it, we have to face it, look around! FACT: niggers are a problem wherever they go. I don't even need to cite anything, just pick up today's newspaper or turn on the news to see for yourself.

Society was once referred to as Polite Society for a reason. We must come to understand that if you throw a monkey into civilization, it is going to break shit!

Anonymous said...

Short comment, maybe more to come.

I do love how every time blacks point out examples of achievement they trot out the same, comparatively very few blacks, in certain fields.

For example, I can't tell you how many times I've seen Ben Carson used as an example of a brilliant black neurosurgeon, over and over again ad nauseum. They are proving the point against them when they have only one to constantly point to.

jungewerther said...

I am not European. I am not White. I am Latin. I don't speak English very well, but I can express myself at least. And I want to rant that, in many nations we are taught Black People were slaves in the US and we were pushed to think they were the victims; but today, after living sometime here and watching what they do, it's just not possible to be intelligent and make some research about the roots of this "sub-species". These guys almost make me cry, but not because they were lovely. I will tell why. I remember when I was watching the news about Haiti's earthquake some years ago; there was a report about a girl been shot to death by another negro just because one girl was shop lifting taking advantage of the chaos. I mean, seriously... killling a 9 years old girl , for a single shop lifting, in between a state of chaos? Those apes do not have morality in their brains, nor can they feel any sympathy for their people. If they had had these values, could they have been sold as slaves by other negro tribes, their foes? For those who do not accept it. check history and facts. Statistics speak, negros are dangerous.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with the majority of what you have stated. We are not human, I truly believe this although I wish it wasn't so. Although I am black, I had the luxury of being raised in a white family. My entire life I have been ashamed of sharing a race with blacks. Everywhere I go I see examples of the animalistic and vile behaviors you have mentioned. I actively try to avoid blacks wherever I go because I feel they are the scum of society. Unfortunately the majority aren't as luck as me to have been raised by civilized people. I just hope that someday people will realize just how bad it is getting and actually do something about it. Until then all I can do is my part in trying to make this world a better place.

P.S. RAP ISN'T FUCKING MUSIC

Anonymous said...

For those that bring the tired old argument that there is little genetic genetic difference between us and blacks well so there is between us and fishes. It's tiny between us and other mammals. Still there is a huge difference, a big part of the DNA isn't used in each species so in fact the effective differences can be very big and sometimes a slight mutation encoding a single enzyme can be enough to make someone a drooling retard.

Anonymous said...

I'm Filipino and French, I'm a first generation American. Grew up in Chicago with a lot of blacks. In school all I saw was blacks failing. I just graduated last year and a good number of blacks didn't graduate while all the Asian, white, and mostly hispanics all graduated. I recently joined the navy and what happened to the black kids at my school? There living off of welfare checks and link cards having more babies.... It's stupid my money goes to these sub human people. On the aircraft carrier I was on I bunked with a coon and it was the worst 5 months of my life, even worse than boot camp. He smelled and was. Blacks are the kind of people who get you killed in war. Just send them back to Africa...... I'm tired of them.

666 said...

You do realize that you are wrong on so many level, right? Read this.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/does-race-exist.html

I got more of these.;)

Anonymous said...

Good point. Now look at the argumentative troublemakers animals. They do crime and violence with impunity, then some Mexican kills a black person and they organize through their "churches" (LOL) to get militant and act crazy. Nobody likes crazy, violent, stupid African rangoons running around like crackheads, so any other race that is unfortunate enough to interact with them is going to get really tired of their shenanigans. Let's face it - those animals can't get along with ANYBODY.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

I am a native american and i don't know what to think of this article. I admit i am negatively biased towards black people and reading stuff like this doesn't help me to be a more tolerant person. I feel insulted at afro-centrics who try to claim the Olmecs in south america as black to compensate for something that they lack. I feel they try to latch on other peoples cultures to feel good or special about themselves. It is also a laugh when black women lie to themselves that white women get plastic surgery to look "black." (lip injections,tan) Tanning gives you a golden colour. It doesn't look at all like the colour of a black person. Full lips are found in other races and i noticed the desired lip shape and colour is different than black people. I also do not wish to have children with a black person. I don't find black features to be as attractive as other races. I am sorry but this is honestly how i feel. I know this is racist and not politically correct.

Anonymous said...

I have lived in neighborhoods loaded with blacks. They are animals! You have no idea how they treat each other and themselves, "it's not good". If all you people like them so much then go live in the neighborhoods that are most black. Bet you won't.............and you know why!

Anonymous said...

So let me get one thing off my chest here. Why are all the white kids acting like blacks? WTF is that all about? I'll tell you why. It's because of all you pussies talkin on line in a blog but not having the courage to teach your children to be proud of being who they are! Being white is the best! We are ultimate in every way. Asians are also great people. Latin people are a great race too. So quit being pussies and talk out loud wherever you are about your pride in who you are! The blacks do it and look at the effects it has on our children.........

Anonymous said...

Sometimes I like to say that a lot of white kids today act black because they see that niggers get coddled, that nigger enablers give them everything, they are highly defended, niggers get away with saying "black pride" while whites can't say "white pride" without being frowned upon and labeled as skinhead rednecks, niggers are shoved down our throats in movies now, TV shows, TV ads, they get a history month dedicated to them, TV networks dedicated to them, and we don't.

Maybe these nigger-acting white kids have some subconscious desire to be treated like kings, like niggers are. Must be nice to have preferential treatment like the niggers. Unfortunately, these white kids are headed down a dead end street, because they aren't niggers, and they won't be given the freebies.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

niggers get away with saying "black pride" while whites can't say "white pride" without being frowned upon and labeled as skinhead rednecks, niggers are shoved down our throats in movies now, TV shows, TV ads, they get a history month dedicated to them, TV networks dedicated to them, and we don't."
this is a response to the "Realist" (what an odd name for someone who sees a subjective reality....lol but whatever), so you claim the niggers get away with saying Black pride and whites don't? (BTW it's not only blacks who get away with it, all MINORITIES DO and yet i don't see you bashing on them)...Last i Check Black pride NEVER does not equates to "BLACKS are the most innovative SUPERIOR/MASTER race and all others Barbaric and inferior in comparison"...secondly Hispanics and Other Minorities have those (ever heard of HISPANIC Heritage month we celebrate it from September 15TH- October 15th Why doesn't that upset you?)....you try to DEMONIZE the WHOLE BLACK race (subjectively ignoring THOSE "NIGGERS" who are productive members of society)...and your supposed to be a "REALIST" (a person who is aware of and accepts the physical universe, events, as they are; pragmatist).....if your gonna hate the NIGGERS that's completely fine i Personally don't really care but it's when you and people like yourself who try to JUSTIFY their Innate, Intrinsic Biased Bigotry ie: blacks aren't human because they don't look like , act, or talk like us; interestingly enough you still have not defined what it means to be human(set clear parameters to the all encompassing notion of the human condition). and Finally, whites HAVE had PURE white CHANNELS AND TV shows up until what the 90s? and yet you are still complaining, it's sort of like the fat kid with cookie jar in hand crying because he sees another kid eating a cookie that he wants, that's beyond Hypocritical.

Anonymous said...

Crack this Walnut

"Genes have loose correlations to all sorts of things. Personality, behavior, beliefs, ideals, emotional tendencies, and of course the mother of them all IQ."

"However, none of these correlations are 100%. Many are as low as 20%. What would become of a society that accepted genetic differences, good and bad, and concentrated solely on developing everyone we can to their fullest potential? For instance, suppose someone has a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. If raised correctly, and with enough force of will, this person can avoid drinking and thus never become an alcoholic. Here we have genes weaving their nefarious webs, and culture cutting right through them. How many other victories could we as a nation, and we as individuals, score over our genetic default?"
"but I still can’t help but think how sad it must be to turn to violence, exclusion, and hate as the first and only recourse to every problem. If your daughter said she wasn’t going to eat the broccoli, do you get out the hammer and slug her across the head? Or do you work with her? Individuals make mistakes, societies make mistakes. Sometimes they do the wrong thing"

Diamed aren't you the same guy who posted the comments on your blog above? how do you go from that to Niggers aren't HUMANS?

Diamed said...

'Crack this Walnut' is a challenge to my fellow racists, where I, as a mental exercise, argued the other side. That's why the title challenges people to disprove the argument given, to 'crack this walnut'. It doesn't reflect my true beliefs. You have to look at all my posts in context or they won't make much sense. Sorry for the confusion!

Anonymous said...

To the nigger sucking libtard who questioned my proclamations:

I do bash on them. Their invasion of this country, along with their pride marches and other asinine behaviors, are like a virus. Although they are like cockroaches - dirty, sneaky and reproducing like flies, they are humans.

- The Realist

However, your claim that I have not defined what it means to be human is wrong, and I will define it for you here.

You have to have a soul to be human.

Niggers don't have a soul.

Oh, they like to shuck, jive and say they've got soul, which means they can act like a drunken orangutang and move around to the rhythm of a drum beat, but they do not have a real soul. When they die, a hazmat team in full suits and oxygen scrapes them up from the crime scene and they're properly disposed of so as not to tarnish the water supply (or the air supply for that matter).

Anonymous said...

Niggers don't have a soul.

Oh, they like to shuck, jive and say they've got soul (whose they? thats a generalization offcourse typical uneducated moron not knowing the difference between induction to make a point)

, "which means they can act like a drunken orangutang and move around to the rhythm of a drum beat, but they do not have a real soul. When they die, a hazmat team in full suits and oxygen scrapes them up from the crime scene and they're properly disposed of so as not to tarnish the water supply (or the air supply for that matter)".

??
ok thank you for proving that you are a pathetic CHRISTIAN moron....a soul is a sociological construct meaning it is not TANGIBLE but abstract, a mere figment of the imagination a rather pathetic attempt to add meaning to life ( Anthrocentrism), how do you prove someone has a soul to begin with, please enlighten us, where does it reside? if it does exist the blacks deffinetly have it more than you because i don't see niggers going arround making forums calling for the extermination of an entire race based on the IMMORAL utterances and actions of the manny (yes manny) Racists like yourself...furthermore what contributions have you Personally (BIG emphasis on personal) made to society that makes you, an Individual Superior, to a whole Group of people just because of the color of their skin and how they look? (btw blacks are some of the most if not THE most diverse race on the planet in terms of alleles and Phenotypes ie: widest range in skin tones, hair texture and facial characteristics)

Anonymous said...

"whose they?" Uneducated poltroon, it's "Who's they?" If you had taken advantage of the free education system in America instead of protesting this country's incredible heritage and what it has to offer, you might have developed communication skills. Other errors in your presentation:

- You didn't capitalize "whose."
- You didn't capitalize "thats."
- You didn't put an apostrophe in "thats" to make it "That's."
- It's not "offcourse," it's "of course."

Which elementary school do you attend?

- No punctuation at the end of that first sentence. Bad form, Julio "Swahili" Jackson.

I don't think anybody is calling for the extermination of your shit race, but you know, you might be onto something there. You said it, not I.

If you could spell or construct a decent sentence, I would be convinced that you can read. Since you can't read, I would be beating my head against a wall to suggest that you read through all the above comments by me. You'll find that I said that it's not the color of the skin and how they look, although both are utterly disgusting, with the overly fat lips that hang from the face, the spreadbore nostrils as wide as a bi-fold wallet, long arms for picking cotton, long hands for swinging from branches, fat asses for sitting around on the job, greasy skin for lubricating anything from motorcycle chains to gearboxes, and brillo-pad hair for cleaning wood stoves - it's more than the looks.

Cars can be black and we don't have a problem with them. The colors black, brown and tan are only colors, many of the millions of colors available, and they are just fine with me. A nigger's skin is a warning sign that trouble and crime are on the loose.

Niggers are born criminals. Check the FBI crime stats if you can spell it.

Niggers are murdering, thieving, assaulting, loudmouth, uncivilized beasts that are so offensive on every level, raping civilized beings, ganging up on them, they just have no sense of right and wrong, no matter how much they sit down to learn. No matter how civilized any of them may appear, the inner chimp always comes out at some point, and their uncivilized, animalistic, base behavior is exposed for all the world to see.

If niggers had souls, they could all go straight to hell, and they definitely would - but that would create such a grease fire that the fire marshall would surely shut the place down. Niggers, with their jungle behavior, don't qualify to have souls because it's a lost cause, they're uncoachable, and there's the grease fire problem. Niggers can't buy a soul with all the money in the world. If you want to know what a soul is, ask God, but since you probably don't have a soul yourself, you wouldn't understand.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

I've noticed racist comments against black people, im not black but I know blacks have sufferered the most in history (systemically and consistently for thousands of years to this very day, from the Arabs to the Aryans) from power hungry oppressors, black people have always been victimised and why does the world aim to dehumanise them? sure a lot of them act like animals like any other race they have diversity in ways of thinking and behaving I know of manny black scholars personally. I have served with them in my unit as a former marine, they fight breathe, live, and are brave just like the rest of us. some are racist, ignorant delinquents, but isn't that the nature of man to act immorally at times? even the best of us?.

Understand people we are all human beings that bleed red blood, who have emotions and feel sadness, honestly how can you live in this world and show no compassion for our brothers and sisters out there in the world? Direct your hatred to the corrupt social system!

"ignorance and wrong attitude is the source of Dis-Ease, quiet the self and walk the middle path".

~Buddha~

Diamed said...

I won't acknowledge the achievements of any black person until affirmative action is repealed. All of their credentials are phony and unearned.

When push comes to shove and the awards really mean something, blacks can't earn a single Nobel prize in a science related field, a single Fields medal for mathematics, make any important inventions like the computer or compose any great work of art like Beethoven's 9th symphony.

Who should I believe then? The phony credentials of affirmative action blacks or the statistical reality of their complete lack of accomplishments?

As to whether blacks feel pain, I wonder about that. Do they even have a full range of human emotions? If they did, why don't they have any compassion? What drives them to gang rape infants? To torture and murder 85 year old ladies? To chop children's arms off? Black atrocities defy the imagination, they are things people with empathy couldn't do. As a result, no one else on Earth does them.

Why is it blacks lack empathy? Empathy means imagining that the pain happening to someone else could instead be happening to you. The simple explanation is that they can't feel emotionally sophisticated pain, so they can't imagine what the suffering they inflict on others feels like.

I don't think blacks see or experience the world in the same way real humans do. They are brutes, mere amoral beasts. Otherwise they wouldn't do the things they do.

Worst of all, they never feel any guilt or shame, no matter how cruel or destructive they become. When these black criminals attend trials for their crimes, they smile and laugh at the testimony of victims who are crying on the stands about how much harm they've done. That just isn't a human mentality.

Anonymous said...

As to whether blacks feel pain, I wonder about that. Do they even have a full range of human emotions? If they did, why don't they have any compassion? What drives them to gang rape
infants? To torture and murder 85 year old ladies? To chop children's arms off?"am I right in assuming that Amoral acts of rape, murder, are done on a larger scale by the blacks? And therefore Amoral acts of Murder, rape and the like prove how subhuman they are?.

as far as rape is concerned if you can show hard eveidence that only blacks commit child rape (rediculous supposition) you will have me convinced.
"I don't think blacks see or experience the world in the same way real humans do. They are brutes, mere amoral beasts. Otherwise they wouldn't do the things they do."

http://www.timbooktu.com/spence/burning.html

Only 113 years ago, King Leopold II of Belgium massacred 10 million Africans in the Congo Cutting off hands (and yes the elderly and children were massacred as well). "worst of all, they never feel any guilt or shame, no matter how cruel or destructive they become". <<---I highly doubt King Leopold had any remorse for what he did (ofcourse that's just one crude example there are countless others if we just revisit American History)...

http://www.timbooktu.com/spence/burning.html

Anonymous said...

I've never read so much garbage in my life. The fact is that there's hardly any variation between human beings the entire globe over. Human beings are virtual clones and cannot by scientific standards be classified into subspecies. The Human Genome Project has verified this.

Oh, and Rushton has been nailed dozens of times for poor sampling, distorting data and making it up as he goes along. He's a fruit.

The blog is a totally hateful distortion and factually devoid rant from an extremely ignorant and twisted racist.

Go get some mental assistance, jerk.

Anonymous said...

There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

Shove that up your arse.

Anonymous said...

the concept of distinct biological "races" that can be studied, compared and found to be "superior" or "inferior" is itself a misnomer. The term race, in biology, properly refers to subspecies (i.e. subpopulations that are sufficiently different in genetic terms to be on the verge of "speciation," or splitting into entirely new species). So, those who defend the notion of scientific "racial" differences must be able to demonstrate that human subpopulations diverge in such a manner and to such a degree.

But such "proof" is impossible to come by, because, in fact, science disproves it conclusively. To begin with, 68% of all human genes are identical between all humans, and have no polymorphic variation whatsoever. Thus, to whatever degree any two human individuals (let alone groups of persons) differ from one another, these differences are, by definition, limited to the approximately one-third of genes where difference is even theoretically possible.

When this 32% of genes that could contain "differences" have been studied in-depth (Nei and Roychoudhury 1982), it is found that the net codon differences between human "racial" groups are significantly smaller than the differences between two randomly selected genomes from within a particular group. In other words, if whites and blacks are subspecies, and inherently different, this would mean that there would have to be thousands of subspecies within the "white" group, and "black" group as well, since the in-group differences are so much larger than the inter-group differences.

In fact, 96.8% of the genetic code between blacks and whites is shared, with only a maximum of 0.032 of the genes varying between any white or black person. The variation between whites and Asians is 0.019 (98.1% similarity), and the difference between blacks and Asians is 0.047 (95.3% similarity). These differences are far too small to indicate subspeciation, as such phenomenon would typically be characterized by variation many times greater than the above numbers. There are no subspecies of a given phylum with this high a degree of genetic overlap, anywhere in nature.

Unless one can show that the miniscule variation indicated by the above data is sufficient to produce the variations in "intelligence," crime rates, fertility, etc then the claims of those arguing for scientific superiority/inferiority along racial lines is automatically nonsense. Even to classify one as black, white, asian, etc. becomes nonsensical, and most of either group (self-defined or culturally/nationally-defined) will be even closer to one another than the above variation would imply, since the above variation would be for totally "pure" versions of each group, few of which actually exist, particularly in the West

http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ukwise.htm

Shove some more up that ass you use to talk through

Diamed said...

Organized violence for the sake of some political end is totally different from sadistic crime for its own sake.

More importantly, nobody but blacks engage in gang infant rape. I've never heard of gruesome cases like this anywhere else in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_violence_in_South_Africa

South Africa has some of the highest incidences of child and baby rape in the world.[8] More than 67,000 cases of rape and sexual assaults against children were reported in 2000 in South Africa, compared to 37,500 in 1998. Some cite a 400% increase in sexual violence against children in the decade preceding 2002.[9] A third of the cases are committed by a family member or close relative.[10] Child welfare groups believe that the number of unreported incidents could be up to 10 times that number. The largest increase in attacks was against children under seven.

A number of high-profile baby rapes appeared since 2001 (including the fact that they required extensive reconstructive surgery to rebuild urinary, genital, abdominal, or tracheal systems). In 2001, a 9-month-old was raped and likely lost consciousness as the pain was too much to bear.[11] Another 9-month-old baby was raped by six men, aged between 24 and 66, after the infant had been left unattended by her teenage mother. A 4-year-old girl died after being raped by her father. A 14-month-old girl was raped by her two uncles. In February 2002, an 8-month-old infant was reportedly gang raped by four men. One has been charged. The infant has required extensive reconstructive surgery. The 8-month-old infant's injuries were so extensive, increased attention on prosecution has occurred.[9]

Diamed said...

It may or may not be true that smart people lack 'prejudice.' Perhaps they're smart enough to know that in today's society, you must PRETEND you aren't prejudiced, and are lying to the polls.

They may also have become so adept at conforming to modern society that they really do believe prejudice is wrong, but this too is meaningless. When smart people are free to believe what they like, without any politically correct thought police, they end up like Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, and other luminaries who all realized blacks were inferior to whites and said so as a matter of course.

I find it funny that people who say IQ doesn't matter and IQ tests aren't accurate will suddenly cling to them if they say something bad about 'prejudiced' people. But IQ and having the correct beliefs about something are completely unrelated. High IQ people used to believe in communism, another equality cult, and look where that got them.

Diamed said...

Twin studies have shown definitively, beyond any doubt, accepted by all psychologists, that intelligence is at least 50% hereditary, ie, genetic.

These 'tiny few genes' you dismiss as unimportant are in fact the most important genes of all. We also share 98% or so of our genome with chimps, but we're far smarter than chimps. The same applies here. We share the unimportant genes, like sulfur ion channels, with blacks, but we don't share our higher genes, like IQ, with them.

Since we know for a fact Africans have 70 IQ, whereas Europeans have 100 IQ, and we know for a fact that IQ is hereditary, and we know for a fact that African American babies adopted into white households have no higher IQ than their biological parents, we know decisively that the IQ differences between the races are genetic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

White adopted children at 17 had an average IQ of 106, but black adopted children, raised by the exact same cohort of white adopters, only had an average IQ of 89 at 17. Even when black children share the exact same environment as white children, the enormous gap in IQ remains.

It's meaningless that there is more genetic variation within races than between races, because none of those genes matter as much as the genes that separate the races. Quality matters more than quantity. The genes that separate the races are all important, like personality and IQ, whereas the genes that vary within a race are all unimportant, like metabolism rates or bone density. Just looking at numbers obscures the obvious truth in front of your eyes, two random whites are far more similar in appearance, personality, intelligence, and behavior than a random white and a random black.

Diamed said...

Rushton hasn't been discredited, he's just been attacked by politically correct hounds who howl about how he "can't SAY that!" If he's been discredited (and Lynn and Jensen who share his views has been too), then provide real links proving where they lied about their scientific findings.

In fact, it's Gould who has been discredited. His Mismeasure of Man book is a complete and total fraud.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-mismeasures-of-gould

Anonymous said...

"Organized violence for the sake of some political end is totally different from sadistic crime for its own sake.

More importantly, nobody but blacks engage in gang infant rape. I've never heard of gruesome cases like this anywhere else in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_violence_in_South_Africa"


really at the bottom of the link you provided it states India
Nineteen percent of the world's children live in India,[164][165] which constitutes 42 percent of India’s total population.[166]
In 2007 the Ministry of Women and Child Development. The study's[164] main findings included: 53.22% of children reported having faced sexual abuse. Among them 52.94% were boys and 47.06% girls...Seems to me you are DELIBERATELY excluding other groups and targeting the blacks (TEK_KNOWLEDGE) was unto something when he said you have a hidden agenda

Anonymous said...

"Organized violence for the sake of some political end is totally different from sadistic crime for its own sake." that's a very civilized way of looking at things wouldn't you agree?. Oh so it's okay to massacre Millions for the "greater" good which would be my own personal gain right?. do you seriously think about what you spew out of your mouth before uttering such nonsense?.

Diamed said...

What part of 'gang infant rape' do you not understand?

How is that in any way similar to children in India 'facing sexual abuse'?

Anonymous said...

http://urbantitan.com/10-most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world-in-2011/

hmm most dangerous city in the world has no Niggers in it wow!!! some more interesting stuff.

Diamed said...

Most of the cities that weren't black were war zones or drug traffic zones. IE, political, purposeful violence.

Black violence is mindless and serves no purpose. St. Louis isn't a war zone, and yet there it is in your top 10 cities. That's the difference.

Diamed said...

As to your claim that South Africa's crime rate is lower than Japan's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

South Africa: 32 per 100,000
Japan: .83 per 100,000 (including attempts).

Give me a break.

Anonymous said...

(bogota columbia)While security in Colombia has improved significantly in recent years, violence by narco-terrorist groups continues to affect some rural areas as well as the capital city, Bogota. In August 2010, a car bomb exploded outside the Caracol radio station in Bogota and in October, Colombian authorities claimed that they had foiled another car bomb attack directed at the National Administrative Center in Bogota. Some criminal organizations continue to kidnap and hold civilians for ransom or as political bargaining chips. The fact that Colombia has one of the highest violent crime rates in the world is quite enough for understanding how dangerous Botota is. War zone?, this is a country terrorized by drug cartels and gangs what are you talking about warzone?. who made you the expert of criminology, determining What crimes are worse than others , all crime is senseless that's why its a CRIME...

Anonymous said...

I don't argue with stupid niggers if I can help it, because their minds are so greasy, like their skin, that no matter how much common sense and logic you throw at them, none of it sticks.

Let me just refer to the FBI crime statistics and the CDC disease statistics. Niggers are the worst vermin of any bipedal creature on Earth.

As for the people who cut off nigger hands, that sounds like it was a good way to keep niggers from stealing. Unfortunately, it wasn't enough to keep them from reproducing. If somebody comes up with a surefire way to keep niggers from reproducing, they'll be richer than Bill Gates.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ukwise.htm

you'll find this an interesting read especially with regards to you hero Rushton: his "scientific methodology" has included approaching shoppers at a Toronto mall (one-third black, one-third white, and one-third Asian) and asking them "how far can you ejaculate," or "how large is your penis?" He has also said, that intelligence is inversely related to penis size, because "it's more brain or more penis. You can't have everything," and has claimed that the success of the Nazi army was due to its Aryan genetic purity.

Diamed said...

There is a clear inverse correlation between penis size and intelligence. Asians are the smartest and have the smallest penises, and blacks are the dumbest and have the largest. Nazis were great warriors. If Rushton did a poll in a mall I'm sure it was done with the listener's consent, but it sounds like a myth.

None of this contradicts his scientifically footnoted books and papers that he has published across a lifetime in academic journals. None of this says any of his book, Race, Evolution, and Behavior, has doctored any of its facts or studies. Maybe Rushton is a cross-dresser who likes talking about dicks. That's completely irrelevant as to whether his scientific studies are accurate or frauds. You said one thing and provided evidence for another.

Like usual liberals can't win any arguments because all the facts are against them, so they resort to the politics of personal destruction. It's all about lies, innuendo, and out-of-context quotes to make your opponent look as bad as possible, without ever countering a single argument they make.

Anonymous said...

"Asians are the smartest and have the smallest penises, and blacks are the dumbest and have the largest."
this is a stereotype as an asian I am greatly offended there is simply no truth to this. Typical racist going off on racist supositions to make sense of Idiotic Ideals

Diamed said...

It's a stereotype because it's true. It's a statistical fact. If you think it isn't true, don't just 'say so,' prove it with scientific studies.

I also find it hilarious that you would care about penis size as somehow more important than intelligence, and therefore be offended instead of honored to be a member of the smartest race.

According to your logic, I suppose horses are superior to all humans because their dicks are bigger than ours? Or maybe as 'a human' you're offended and think that's just a stereotype. I guess your penis is larger than a stallion's.

Anonymous said...

I guess that might be one sick reason why some race traitors will have sex with a negroloid. They might secretly hope that they can end "short penis syndrome" in their family tree. Unfortunately, all they'll do is dumb down the more intelligent species in the next generation and pass on the short penis to their offspring.

Sometimes I wonder if negroloids make their penises longer by constant masturbating, which they do. Just go to the zoo and you'll see them masturbating constantly. Then go look at niggers with clothes. They're constantly pulling at their crotches, essentially masturbating through their clothing. Disgusting, revolting niggers. They do not belong in a civilized world.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

I am back again. All said and understood. But what now? The Negroids are not human. Anybody who is not a negroid knows that. What do you do now? What do you do? These things will eventually become a part of a human society. At least in the U.S., they are everywhere. They breed like rats and will continue to do that. While you and I wait for a better situation to have a kid, these things reproduce like cockroaches. You might be a genius among the retards, but when the population is majorly retarded, you are the outcast. Insects have been a very successful species, not because of their philosophy, but because of their breeding pattern. You can not stop the Negroes, they will outbreed you. Anyway, any suggestions is appreciated. By the way, I am not white and not even a light negro or chink (largely known as asians).

Diamed said...

If non-blacks did understand the true nature of blacks, they wouldn't be allowed to integrate with our societies or breed like rats. The truth is most people think blacks are equal to non-blacks in every way, and that the sole reason they fail at anything is due to non-black racism.

Until we can change that prevailing opinion, nothing else can change. It's almost useless to talk about what happens next, because nothing can happen until people understand and face reality.

If you want advice for what to do given that the lies are never dispelled, the answer is simple, retreat to a safe, non-black neighborhood and avoid interacting with them or the liberals who worship them. There's still as much segregation in the USA as in the 1950's, it's just done by zoning laws and income disparities now.

Live in a world that is sane and good, however small that world has to become to be so. Separate from all the madness. Then wait for the inherent insanity of the system to bring itself down. Eventually this equality cult, just like communism, will vanish into the ash heap of history.

666 said...

You also need to read this thread.

http://www.forum4politics.com/race-relations/242538-why-race-realism-pseudoscience.html

Diamed said...

I read the article and it in no way 'debunks' Rushton.

Some guy named Graves says Rushton's R-K theory of HOW racial differences came about is wrong. This is irrelevant. Even if they came about because the tooth fairy waved a magic wand, the fact would remain that the racial differences EXIST.

It is not of central importance why some races are genetically smarter than others. What's of central importance is that they ARE genetically smarter than others.

As for this central point, Graves just dismisses an entire book full of facts, decades of scientific studies, as 'questionable' or 'unreliable.' Wow, that's a great way to win a debate. Ignore the thousands of IQ studies that all prove Rushton's case by just saying none of them are accurate, not one IQ test in the last hundred years, anywhere on Earth.

It has been proven beyond ALL DOUBT that IQ is hereditary. Not a single psychologist will debate this, because identical twins share a higher IQ correlation than fraternal twins. The only possible explanation for this is genes, since identical twins and fraternal twins share the exact same environment.

Further collaborating data for this is that adopted children have zero, zip, no correlation to the IQ of their adopted parents, but have the same correlation as everyone else to their biological parents. This cannot be explained by environmental causes.

So basically Graves is harping on about a completely irrelevant detail which isn't important, while ignoring the massive truckload of data that all proves Rushton right.

The only person this article discredits is Graves.

666 said...

Also this.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121155220.htm

Diamed said...

I read that article too, and again it doesn't prove what you think it proves.

Lynn's study isn't flawed, because African American IQ has also been deeply studied, not just by Lynn but by the United States Armed Forces Qualification Test, and African American IQ is 85. Even if by some horrible error Lynn underestimated African IQ, the only level it could possibly rise to is 85.

The Flynn effect may eventually raise African IQ in the future, but that has nothing to with the accuracy of Lynn's measurements at this moment. Again, no matter how cushy an environment you put Africans into, they still drag an entire standard deviation behind whites.

Apparently the reason why Lynn is wrong is because in the future he'll be wrong! That's some amazing reasoning.

666 said...

I added somethings to the thread(not an article) myself(look at it again). Like that video that debunks the promise of this blog you've made that I tried to post earlier(a few times as a matter of fact) but didn't get approved (thanks for finally approving it;D). Plus the study you're referring to didn't take in pre-adoption conditions.

Diamed said...

Sorry, but I don't have the time or the internet connection to watch random 30 minute youtube videos. If you don't make the argument directly, in text, I can't answer it.

666 said...

As I've said before I post it a few times here(for the past few days) You've clearly had plenty of time. So why didn't you approve the very first time?

Diamed said...

It's not that I physically didn't have the time to watch it. I meant that, mentally speaking, my time is too valuable to waste it on thirty minute long youtube rambles. I will never have enough time to waste it on junk like that.

666 said...

The link I posted talked about the black African IQ, not the African American IQ.

666 said...

"It's not that I physically didn't have the time to watch it. I meant that, mentally speaking, my time is too valuable to waste it on thirty minute long youtube rambles. I will never have enough time to waste it on junk like that."


Oh, so you just didn't want to watch it and just rushed to the conclusion that it was junk? You should, you might learn something. Especially at 4:30 and onward.

666 said...

You also didn't watch the other videos in the thread.

666 said...

I would also like to comment about the child rape in Africa. That is happening because they think cutes AIDS not really because they want to.

666 said...

According to the study you mentioned: The black kids had an IQ of 95(two points above mine) at the age of 7 but it went down at the age of 17. Interesting.

Anonymous said...

IQ is believed to be at least 40% heritability, not 50%.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUjo31DChcE&feature=player_embedded#!
Very interesting scientific debate (yes your hero J. Philippe Rushton is in there). This is a must see video if you are indeen interested in Morphology, Intelligence, Genetic differences between races

Anonymous said...

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/nisbett-on-rushton-and-jensen.pdf

fascinating stuff

Diamed said...

Nisbett was already answered and refuted here:

http://www.vdare.com/articles/advocacy-by-omission-richard-e-nisbetts-intelligence-and-how-to-get-it

666 said...

http://www.forum4politics.com/1061127933-post269.html

Interesting stuff here. I don't know why you complain about black people.

Diamed said...

Your numbers are off:

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_03.html

Blacks committed 5,943 homicides in 2008, and were probably the majority of the 4,727 homicides committed by 'race unknown,' because they commit the majority of known murders. So let's say they killed 8,500 people in 2008.

Average length of life is 78 years. So if 42 million blacks kill 8,500 people for 78 years in a row, the true ratio is 1.6% of blacks are murderers.

So if you meet 50 blacks in your life, one of them will be a murderer. Do you care to play that game of russian roulette? Most every white doesn't, which is why we've abandoned every major city in America to the black plague.

Anonymous said...

http://mathsci.free.fr/graves.pdf

this article is a quick presentation of emperical data, ( btw if you have problem understanding/interpreting them please feel free to posit questions) was a critique of Rushton's life history theory which is centered around r-K theory. That ecological theory was falsified by empirical experiments over the course of a few decades and almost universally abandoned by the 1990s.
furthermore recent studies by Flynn and Dickens show that younger Blacks are closing the ominous Black-White IQ gap, as the environment of Blacks improves---> here is the link check it out yourself http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/blacks-close-the-black-white-iq-gap/ and controlling for environmental conditions in some studies actually shows that there is no IQ gap. So the idea that there is all of this evidence that the IQ gap is caused Entirely by genetics and no evidence to the contrary is false. Hereditarians make this claim by selectively citing data and ignoring contradictory evidence (confirmation bias).

Black-White gaps differ by age for unknown reasons. According to F & D, Black IQ is 98.4 at age 4, 92.5 at age 12, 92.4 at age 14, 90.0 at age 18 and 86.4 for 24 yr olds. By age 24, the familiar 15 t gap is back with us (hmm perhaps Environment does in deed have something to do with why black IQ seems to Go DOWN as they get older don't you think?)

Diamed said...

It's precisely the opposite inference. The fact that no matter what you do to a black during childhood, they all end up 1 standard deviation dumber than whites, is precisely proof that genetics, not the environment, matters.

Whether you treat them like kings or paupers, they all end up at the same place in adulthood. This is exactly in line with what genetics would predict.

Everyone knows childhood brains are plastic. They can learn new languages extremely fast. They are willing to believe anything they are told. And so on. This plasticity is mirrored by a plasticity in IQ. But as they age, the plasticity fades away and the fixed, immovable realities of race set in. Once people are adults, their IQ, their beliefs, and their language abilities are all set in stone. It's all part of the same developmental process, which genetics set up for all creatures great and small. (Learn as a kid, do as an adult.)

No serious IQ test has 'erased' the black-white gap. For the same reason, PISA tests, SAT tests, and every other test of academic achievement always has a black-white gap. There is simply an overwhelming amount of data, millions of studies, that show over and over again that blacks are the worst test takers at EVERYTHING. Firemen tests, army tests, any test you throw at them, they'll fail it.

Anonymous said...

I was refered to your blogg by a friend, this is some rather fascinating and interesting read (and yes i'm a nigger therefore subhuman as you put it). First of all, Rushton says that Brain size is related to Intelligence (head circumference and the like). Recent study shows the opposite, as is demonstrated in Autistic children. The autistic brain is, on average, larger and heavier than a "normal" brain" if indeed there is Emperical evidence proving that brain size and intelligence are Directly related ergo Autistic Children should in fact posess an "above" average intelligence no?

secondly: "The fact that no matter what you do to a black during childhood, they all end up 1 standard deviation dumber than whites, is precisely proof that genetics, not the environment, matters". I was one of the few privileged enough to attend a Private school, provided the proper educational tools and family reinforcement I did perform as well and sometimes better then the majority of my so called "Intellectual superior" white peers. It fascinates me how you just throw all blacks into the "dumb" pile.

third: "For the same reason, PISA tests, SAT tests, and every other test of academic achievement always has a black-white gap". you really are delusional, let me counter with the following. According to the College Board, the SAT DOES not measure any innate ability but rather developed reasoning described as the skills that students develop not only in school but also OUTSIDE of school ie: reading books, SAT PREPS (which DISPROPORTIONATE blacks DO NOT have access to). I'm a Physics College professor and I also teach in highschool, I will go so far as to claim (yes I am risking my neck out on this one) That the SAT (is understandably so) a measurement of how immersed/exposed one is to Anglo-American Hegemony. a clear example of this is the 2010 SAT, some of the Questions were pertaining to "Martha's Vineyard", do you expect me to believe that a poor Urban kid (regardless of race but let's say black) will have the same ability to understand the story as well as a child (regardless of race, but let's say white) from a middle or upper-middle class from upstate New York who has been EXPOSED to this sort of Material countless times?.

Third: I don't know about the Firemen tests so I will not comment on that. However, with regards to army tests,rushton himself in a conference--->(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUjo31DChcE&feature=player_embedded#! time 32minutes into the video) said the following: "one of the studies carried out in the United States armed forces showed that black officers have higher cranial capacities and higher IQ scores than do white enlisted personnel" in other words black officers are on average more intelligent than white officers. This Guy really contradicts himself, you should try to READ thorough this link i posted in my first comment:http://mathsci.free.fr/graves.pdf

Using great Circumspection, feel free to POSIT any questions pertaining to r-k Theory.

Diamed said...

The college board is lying. The SAT is a thinly veiled IQ test, and correlates more closely to IQ than income or education levels.

The Armed Forces Qualification Test is an IQ test and it continuously churns out the same data, blacks have lower IQ than whites. Any anecdotal evidence about a smaller segment of the population is meaningless.

Firemen are constantly being sued because their employment tests have a disparate impact on black applicants, ie, they can't pass the test. How to put out fires isn't rocket science but still blacks can't pass the entrance examinations whereas almost all whites who apply can. This, again, is proof of the eternal IQ divide.

I speak of blacks as a group, taken as a whole, on average. I say nothing of individual blacks, nor do I say that absolutely every single black is retarded. Read more carefully.

I think higher IQ people are more subject to autism, just like they're more subject to insanity, depression, and other drawbacks. Look up the life stories of our most famous mathematicians, poets, or philosophers, and they're almost all mental, emotional wrecks -- many die young. The price of just a little bit more intelligence is extremely high, or else obviously we all would have evolved to have it.

Basically the geniuses of our race sacrifice their own happiness for the betterment of us all. The best of them win recognition and praise, while the rest are labeled autistic or schizophrenic and are quietly discarded.

Various studies give a .4 correlation between brain size and intelligence. It isn't everything, but it's a lot. With this in mind, it's telling that monkeys have smaller brains than blacks, and blacks have smaller brains than whites, who have smaller brains than asians. This would be indicative to an open mind.

There's no point harping on and on about whether R-K theory is true or not, because it's utterly irrelevant to whether blacks do, in fact, have lower IQ than whites.

Anonymous said...

fascinating how you just cast aside all evidence that prove your ideologies to be fallacious and INCONCLUSIVE. If being objective is your goal as you seem to imply, you need not to refute contradictory evidence but rather COMPARE them and see which circumspectly holds true. spewing out Biased and Pseudoscience to back up racist Ideologies ie: blacks are INNATELY inferior to the rest of humanity in every way

Pseudoscience

1. Come up with the desired conclusion.
2. Gather facts that support the conclusion.
3. Find excuses for the facts that do not fit

does it sound familiar?

this is science: Science

1. Gather facts.
2. Come up with a hypothesis to make sense of them.
3.MOST IMPORTANTLY Test the hypothesis (Empirically).

I can come up with a number of hypothesis until they can be SCIENTIFICALLY tested than they are just that, simple hypothesis not theoretical facts (objective facts not suppositions).

Diamed said...

100 years of IQ studies isn't enough evidence?

World history isn't enough evidence?

Africa isn't enough evidence?

Haiti isn't enough evidence?

All reality, all experience, all studies in the whole world have revealed this basic central fact, blacks are inferior. Your only opposition is various claims about how their inferiority is always someone else's fault.

True science abides by the law of occam's razor. If there is one simple explanation that can explain everything, it is the preferable explanation to needing 10,000 explanations for each individual fact.

This is how real science looks like:

Blacks are inferior, and always have been, because it's in their nature.

Fake science:

Blacks are inferior, and always have been, because their zebras were too feisty to tame, and then mean slavers were too warlike for their peace loving nature, and then they weren't allowed to drink from a water fountain, and then the tests were all biased, and then the very law code was secretly scheming against them, and then they didn't receive enough handouts, and then the legacy of everything that happened before started to haunt them, and then stereotypes due to this legacy started haunting them, and then colonialism ruined Africa but not Hong Kong or any other colony, and then US army interventions ruined all of the burgeoning republics of Congo, etc, etc.

Liberalism is the exact anti-thesis of science. It relies on specific causes to describe general events, just like Ptolemies theories of epicycles upon epicycles. It isn't elegant. It isn't clean. It isn't explanatory. None of its predictions ever bear fruit.

Science relies on one simple equation, like F = MA, to explain everything. It takes many different things, like an apple falling a tree and galaxy formation, and explains them all through one single, common force.

Science when applied to race has that single force: IQ. It is the gravity of sociology. It is a beautiful, elegant, full explanation of the whole world via a single formula, and its predictions are always right.

Japan > Haiti.
Finland > Nigeria.
I > you.

:P

Anonymous said...

Japan > Haiti.
Finland > Nigeria.
I > you

? really i could place any third world country in those categories

Japan > pakistan.
Finland > Columbia.
I > you

does that mean the people of Japan are Superior than the Pakistani people, the Finnish to Columbians?. leave it to a racist to make illogical comparisons

"Science relies on one simple equation, like F = MA, to explain everything. It takes many different things, like an apple falling a tree and galaxy formation, and explains them all through one single, common force." and yet you claim genetics (one thing)is the answer to everything, I mean do you see how delusional you are? the quote does not apply to your case lol

keyword--->>"BLACKS are inferior, and always have been, because it's in their nature" your racial biase spews out in Everything you have to say. how is that an Objective REALITY?

Anonymous said...

this is a clear example of why i don't debate cultural Marxists anymore. when logic fails they turn to insult and denial, and yet claim to see an objective reality?

Anonymous said...

you claim to be superior to me (since i'm a nigger and of african descent). what have you done personally that makes you an Individual superior to me? let me guess the fact that you are caucasian (most likely you have some black or asian admixture since there no longer is such a thing as "pure white"). what great deed have you accomplished to be born white?. you are most definitely NOT mentally my equal much less superior (your obvious ignorance will attest to that). Economically, well I highly Doubt someone who sits home all day watching Japanese Anime and reading pseudoscience material(yes i check out your other blogs) is economically as stable As I am.

Anonymous said...

This thing is still here? Yes, there are some blacks, well a lot of blacks, who are violent and could care less about school. However, I have met a few blacks who do extremely well. I was surprised to find out myself that 6 of the top 10 kids in my graduating class were not white. One girl came from Nigeria, another from India, etc. Most of my school was actually white, then Hispanic. So all you guys saying that black people are sub-human and cannot perform up to a white student are obviously wrong. Yes, many black people upset me verily but there are a few and because of those few, they must be human. Most of them are just lazy and uneducated.

Anonymous said...

You all bore me. There are smart black people. Just very few who care to do something with their life.

Garrett Morgan- invented the Gas Mask

Lewis Latimer- invented the carbon filament in light bulbs

Elijah McCoy- invented lubricators for steam engines

Patricia Bath- invented the Laserphaco Probe

Mark Dean- holds 3 out of 9 of IBM's original patents and was a chief engineer there when the PC was created

Anonymous said...

Why no looting or gang rape in Japan after the earthquake? Because the majority of Asian people are intelligent and have honor.

But not in Haiti or New Orleans since the black parasites do what blacks do best! rape,murder and destroy!

You liberals are nothing but uneducated subhuman scumbags just like the savage blacks you love so much!

Anonymous said...

despite barriers restricting their educational opportunities, the number of African-Americans with bachelor’s degrees increased dramatically between 2000 and 2010, according to the U.S. census.
Forty-eight percent MORE black people age 25 and over held at least a bachelor’s degree by the end of the decade (meaning 48% Increase in Black College Grads Nationwide). blacks as a group have started doing better in the turn of the century, thus proving that they are not "genetically" doomed for failure,they do have the potential to pursue the finer things in life just like the rest of Humanity, however the issue seems to be a state of mind, lack of parental guidance, moral values etc.. I think this racist rant does put forth some rather Interesting observations, however the conluding statement that "blacks" in general aren't human is somewhat misleading when we analyze the precise parameters established defining the human condition.

Anonymous said...

I attend a medical university, and I'll tell you right now that these niggers are shuffled through. They know enough to keep their mouths shut (because the teachers tell them to, so they don't reveal their utter ignorance) and these niggers have closed door meetings with the teachers to fix their pitiful, failing grades.

One time another student (a nigger) and I were quizzed by two experienced people (one was a nigger in charge due to affirmative nigger-enabling) with about 35 questions, and the gap-toothed, jut-jawed nigger couldn't answer anything. I gave her one of them because it was so elementary. I was stunned that she was so stupid that she couldn't answer anything!

Naturally the nigger who was in charge of that department won't hire any white people, but she's got some dumb-ass niggers working for her who don't know anterior ribs from posterior. White people who have worked with her and went to school with her don't want to talk about it, but when they do, they let me know that they know her, and that she's a dumb ass who doesn't deserve to be the boss. They allude to the fact that it's affirmative action BS, which gets NO respect from the white people.

It's pitiful when the "boss" is dumber than the students, then she hires on a racist nigger basis, keeping the entire workforce under her dumb as hell and inept.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

As soon as a city hits about 20% black it is doomed to failure. See it time and time again.

Anonymous said...

"As soon as a city hits about 20% black it is doomed to failure. See it time and time again."

really?

"http://www.timbooktu.com/spence/burning.htm"

Know your History

Anonymous said...

Here's another interesting read. A neighborhood is doomed if it's constituents are Poor and Uneducated, Race has nothing to do with it, leave it to a racist to base every judgement on Stereotypes.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_1_62/ai_n16807718/

Anonymous said...

Interesting article, however reading your comments I can see the Hypocrisy spewing out of you when you claim that the blacks are a sub species to the rest of us Humanity (mainly us whites). As an Italian I came from a deeply racist background (the difference between us Italians and you white supremacist pussies is that we will be openly racist in person , we don’t create ridiculous blogs to complain about how we feel). I’m ashamed to say this but in my teens and early college years I held similar beliefs about the blacks (I grew up arround that kind of mentality), you have pointed out some interesting facts differentiating between the races (i.e: crime rate, IQ, out of Africa theory, anthropology etc..). using great circumspection, upon reading this material it is fascinating to me how you base this “objective” analysis on such a great fallacy. The very use of these concepts to prove they are animals by nature DOES in fact reflect their humanity in your eyes. This is Counter-intuitive and quite Contradictory, I mean since when do we start collecting IQ tests, Crime rates, AIDS, Anthropology on Animals (these are ONLY applicable to humans yes? Am I right or am I right?. Secondly animals can’t commit crimes, because well , they’re animals they act out of INSTINCT(to survive) and therefore Crime is not applicable to an animal and thus a black correct?.

Let’s take a look at the supposed IQ differences?. Really Hmm I wonder why the Socio-economically stable nations (ie; Europe, Northeast Asia, and North America ) with better EDUCATION (challenging and competitive) systems uphold the highest IQ’s. So you’re telling me if we take away the schools, deplete the economy, make the education system much less competitive the standard IQ for these nations will remain the same because they By Nature possess such a high IQ? (because according to you Genetics determines Intelligence and they by nature have superior genes). You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that this theory is COMPLETELY biased and objectively infeasible, plain and simple no ifs and buts .


I will end my rebuttal with this: 5 Years ago a relative of mine suffered a horribly fatal car accident and was in dire need of a liver transplant and luckily we were able to get moved up the list just in time, guess what she got the organ from a NIGGER cop who died in duty. I have yet to see Any vital organ be transplanted from an animal to a human being and function successfully. Are you suggesting that she should have died because she got the organ from a subhuman animal, if we are so different as a species why was the implant successful to being with ?. Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t transplants and transfusions successful only between intraspecies just as Intraspecies (same species) produce Viable successful offspring unlike interspecies (ie: a horse and a donkey= mule). If you know of any successful inter species organ and or blood transfusions please let me know.

Diamed said...

I didn't say they were animals, I said they were hominids, like Neanderthals except still alive. Neanderthals could interbreed with humans, in fact they did so and we are the result, but they're still classified as a separate species. If Neanderthals are a different species than homo sapiens, why can't blacks be too?

As for your routine mistake that IQ is affected by education, all I can say is educate yourself on the nature of IQ tests. IQ has nothing to do with education and can be tested by sheer reaction speed to a light turning on.

As for your argument that poverty causes stupidity, instead of the reverse that stupidity causes poverty, why is it that the poorest demographic of whites in the USA still outscore the richest demographic of blacks in the SAT? Why is it that North Koreans have an IQ of 105 or so, despite having a per capita GDP of $1,000 or so, which is around 1/30 that of Black Americans, with an IQ of 85?

What about all billion Chinese, with a per capita GDP of $7,000? Why do they have an IQ of 105? Why doesn't poverty make them stupid? Why do blacks in the USA, who are around four times as rich as Chinese, score far lower than them on IQ tests?

Furthermore, there is a way to test the IQ of uneducated people. It's called history. Long ago the people of Europe were a bunch of fur-clad, tatooed barbarians who knew nothing but war. They couldn't read or write, so they certainly couldn't receive an education. Even so, they transformed themselves into the most advanced civilization on Earth -- no one did it for them. They went from Viking longships to Nokia phones. This shows that they had high IQ all along, and that it was innate, or else they never could have changed from barbarism to civilization.

Blacks had a much easier opportunity than whites to transform their civilization. Everything had already been done for them. All the art, all the technology, all the institutions, all the inventions, all the political and economic theories, everything was ready-made by whites for them to use. All they had to do was model themselves after Europe and, poof, they could be Europe #2. Even monkeys can mimic what they see. But blacks can't do it.

They can't even copy what whites, without any education of their own at the time, invented from scratch. This is irrefutable proof that the nature of the two races must be different genetically. There is simply no other explanation for the difference in capability between these two examples.

Anonymous said...

yup that's right you fell right into the trap i set up for you (the supposed premise that blacks are animals). The first modern humans to leave Africa 80,000 years ago encountered Neanderthal settlements in the Middle East (NEANDERTHALS weren't Indigenous to Africa fool) and ccasions they did cross-breeding, according to an international team of scientists who have pieced together the genetic code of humanity’s closest relatives. on at least some occasions Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, coexisted in Europe and western Asia for more than 10,000 years until Neanderthals disappeared about 30,000 years ago. so Does that mean as a European I'm less human because I have some Neanderthal blood in me? No you're history before you try to educate others, Ignorance is Bliss.

Diamed said...

You're an idiot who can't read.

What part of:

"Neanderthals could interbreed with humans, in fact they did so and we are the result, but they're still classified as a separate species."

Did you not see? Do you think this is news to me? Even more strangely, how do you think this supports your argument instead of mine? You asked for proof of viable offspring from two separate species, I gave you humans and neanderthals. I win, you lose.

And I love this line:

"No you're history before you try to educate others, Ignorance is Bliss."

Ignorance is bliss? Really? From a guy who can't tell the difference between "Know" and "No," and "you're" and "your"?

This has to be the funniest comment in the entire thread.

white african said...

ntunfortunately the author has done nothing but tell the truth.
Look into southern african history and you will find that all these countries prospered before their independence, then they pushed out the whites who brought these countries out of the dark ages, only to ask them to come back when they become failed states.Zimbabwe which used to support itself even through "REAL" sanctions is now a failed state,i know because i live here.
I believe that the faster all blacks acknowledge the fact that they are incapable of even maintaining what is already on the ground let alone creating more opportunities for themselves, the better off they would be.I left school 23 years ago and at that time our population was approximately 12 million, our latest census shows that there are now 10 million people in this country,why? Well let me tell you,firstly all blacks who can get into another country have left without a thought for there so called homeland,and secondly HIV aids, has had a devastating toll on the population.What is amazing is that black americans make the most noise when the race issue arises. Blacks are the worst racists around,but that would be politically incorrect to even fathom. If you read responses from your black population in this forum, you will find that it will just be ranting and raving without any evidence to back what they are saying. This is no different to your ancestors here in africa, who the minute they run out of intelligent things to say start the race game, always the same.Africa and the people who live on it black or white are worse off now than they were during white rule....."FACT" ask any african who has the ability to be honest with himself and he will confirm this. Yes there was segregation,but everybody went to school,everybody had access to hospitals no one went hungry.Look at africa with its so called independence today, all it has are dictators and poverty.Zimbabwe can no longer feed itself, from a country that fed its neighbours to the failed state of today.It is amazing how black americans shout their mouths off but in fact i am yet to see a genuine black american tourist, why dont you come over and get a good taste of what it is like to be in africa? In my opinion the blacks in america have regressed further down the evolutionary scale than blacks from africa,how do you ask? the beauty of technology esspecially television is that we get on the spot televising, black americans are a wining, drug dealing, murderous, self loathing animal species,look at your rediculous prison population,or the amount of uneducated, illiterates you have in your population and get your proof as to what i am saying.And as for the white green peace tree huggers who come to africa under the pretence that they want to help with free hand outs, thank you for creating a society of unproductive black people. I say stay out of africa and let us fend for ourselves, then maybe blacks will be forced to actualy work the land and take charge of their own lives.
Foreigners who come to africa under the pretence that they are trying to help, are here to boost their own egos and increase the value of their portfolios.
The reader must now be asking why i am still in africa,let me help you.
If you give any black african a foreign passport, a plane ticket to wherever they wish and spending money, if they would leave africa i can guaranty you that they would leave .I have all those things but i stay here by choice, not because i have to, because i choose to. NOW WHO WOULD YOU SAY IS A GENUINE AFRICAN? Yes i am white and proud of it.The true reason why black africans do not want to see whites here, is that when they look at us they think of their own inadequacies, "FACT".Yes what i have said is politicaly incorect,but the hard truth is always difficult to bare.

Anonymous said...

I believe this is an issue between the northern and southern hemispheres. It's apparent that humans of the north control the world through dominion consisting of technology, culture,science and sense of the universe, while southern hemispherian creatures seem to be locked into a primitive animality.

We have two distinct special variants of human due to geographic survival. If you live in the north, out of necessity, one would have to use wits to stay alive during harsh seasons. Long range planning through storage of food, limited food resources which would involve guarding food abundant plots, strategies and traditions, customs rallying around survival. Sense of time.

While not Xanadu conditions, living near the equator would provide an abundance of flora and fauna, a climate that stays constant with mild fluctuation and
less need to organize for everyday survival. Even so, equatorial beings aren't pure animals, they themselves have traditions and customs to carve out a standard of living, albeit one that is not as complex as it's brethren to the north. Of course with a kinder environment for survival one would simply need to reach up into a tree to grab a banana, not organize a hunting party to trap a wooly mammoth in a ravine and use a set of maneuvers to kill it.


So, northern creatures have developed an art in survival based on their geography and as a result, their brains expanded, as survival was a more complex set of actions.

Take a southern hemishperian creature and set them in the dizzying complex world of northern survival and you have confusion. Of course there are variants in every group, so there are those that adapt and those that don't. What we have as a problem, is those that don't. Is it simply will that drives adaptation? In my opinion, no. It's genetics combined with environment. Of course genetics drive how we interface with environment.




Blacks are humans, albeit a different construction based on Geography and because of that, you will have problems which won't be rectified in 1,000 years. Unfortunately evolution marches at a slow pace. If you were to take a grizzly bear and transplant to the north amongst Polar bears, it would either die from being under constant assault or due to the harsh environmental conditions. Polar bears wouldn't have the empathy to see the grizzlies unfortunate suffering, which may or not be anything that the grizzly bear could consciously understand of itself.

Basically, blacks do not have the history to combat a northern brain, which has warred with itself, climate and geography for untold centuries in struggle after struggle for survival. this is a cruel dilemma.

In regards to civilization, let's look to Arnold Toynbee, a British historian who looked at the rise and fall of civilizations in cyclical patterns.

Right, so Arnold Toynbee points out creativity as the driving factor of a civilization and there is one distinct civilization that has not participated in the legacy of sharing,a civilization that has not marched upon humanity's silk road.

The Sub-saharan Africans. Why? Again, abundance of flora and fauna, reach into the tree mentality and a forgiving climate. Technically, what a great benefit to have survival handed to oneself. Of course African tribes pummel each other to a bloody pulp and are not blissful creatures molded in the art of harmony and peace. Unfortunately, one loses out against others who have overcome extreme challenges for tens of thousands of years. As late as the 1960's anthropologists were making contact with African tribes who did not know that sex produced offspring, they simply thought that babies appeared due to shamanistic divinity.

Anonymous said...

IQ 70 is Root-Cause of all ills.

internet search: IQ map of the world.

internet: IQ of races

internet: IQ, SAT scores of all groups.

Whites at 100

82-85 IQ in USA

70 IQ in black Africa.

Public facts. Public Data known for 50-100 years now...

Anonymous said...

I will be responding to the poster right before the one just posted before me (speculation, someone can post within the timeframe I am posting). Anyway, yes, that could possibly be true (ie: flaura and fauna). But nothing explains the violence that they exercise in a stable society. People come to the U.S. from around the world for a better life. The Negroes having born here fail to even be equal to the immigrants that come from a culture and thousands of miles away. Whatever the conditions might have been to cause your "so called" northern hemisphere brain enlargement, it is there. Buddy, our brains are bigger, yupp, literally bigger. And as a result an individual with a higher brain recognizes the lower kind and so wants to have nothing to do with it. Yes, species evolved for millennia, and I bet there were hominids before us that made sure that non hominids did not enter the mix. Now that we have hominids and entered into humanity, we ought to make sure that non humans don't enter humanity. Also mr. Diamed, (yes,"m" in mr is lower case because I agree with you but do not respect you), immigrants are not to breed like rats. Even if they do and they are not blacks, it should be OK. But then again, global powers are to be redistributed. It might be you talking in my blog about the blacks, whom us as a human society keep alive. You are right, again, but the blacks are here to stay. People protest about killing apes, you think blacks are going to be allowed to not exist? We as human beings will never be able to do that. That is those low lives' advantage, who will kill and sing about it. But the least and only thing I or you can do is protect our kind. You sound a bit judgmental towards non blacks that are not whites. Hold your horses buddy, we are the nations that you might have to immigrate to and no it's not China, to avoid the blacks. You can only move away so far within one country. Again, these creatures reproduce like insects and they will engulf a state given enough time.

Anonymous said...

Yeah it's me again who just posted a comment. I might have sounded like someone who was really a bad person but there are indeed good black folks. But the majority of them somehow are simply not there, being human and what not. But here is your test of a truth seeker, post this comment of mine or do not post both of my comments. I despise the fact that I am wasting my time commenting on this because this needs addressing, but my friend there are good blacks and you do acknowledge that. That negates the whole of your premise. If they are blacks and they are civilized and human within whatever standard you have, let's just have the world follow through and make its own decision with you in it. Ultimately, being human means being compassionate and getting rid of that which will make me and probably you a nonhuman. I know that I cannot do it, and I guess, nor can you. Your point is well noted, but let just live and let live and go easy on the hate.

Anonymous said...

alright first all homo homonids are human, not all are homo sapian sapians agreed, second whats with all the liberal bashing? being liberal in no way effects the scientific and statistic evidence, third using the word nigger makes you sound like a southerner which becouse of there genetic herdity are black by and large regardless of there color fall under these definitions in this article, forth american blacks have the added problem of having been breed for 200 years as slaves which is probably what has negated the non-black genetics they carry....its just sad to me when racists misuse these truths to make them selves feel better being hatefull about there lacks is silly as they can not help it and one day we shall simply breed them out of exsistence tell then its dificult to see an alternitive to our current situation, also i would put forward that egypt and mesopotamia fell do to dispopotionate interbreeding with blacks over other racial groups resulting in there current medivial stagnation in culture and near lack of any contribution to science n math sense before the crusades.

Anonymous said...

Interesting read so if i get this right basically GENETICS is the answer to everything and since blacks (objectively) act different from the rest of society (according to you) this proves they are genetically inferior and therefore subhuman correct?

According to a 2002 study by researchers Robinson, Bockting, &
Harrell, African Americans reportedly masturbate fewer than whites, averaging 62% at some time in their lives, compared with 98% of white males, am i to deduce these differences to be PURELY genetic and that whites are inherently more sexual to blacks and are therefore subject to this kind of behavior?

that same study also found that most customers (of prostitution) are white, middle-aged married men.
presented with this fact would i be correct in assuming that whites are therefore GENETICALLY (more than any other race) prone to engage in sexual behavior with prositutes?...I mean do you see how foolish the premise is, when you fail to examine outside factors be it social and or economic (ie: most of these men are middle-aged and are Middle to upper class, they therefore have more or less the means to support and actively engage in this type of behavior)blaming genetics for everything is a lazy man's answer in your case (a racist argument)

as an Asian american reading your stats on average IQ tests and behavioral patterns between the races am I correct in concluding that JEWS and us Asians are GENETICALLY Superior to you whites along with the blacks? so in comparison to me (and my superior intellect) you are a subhuman Neanderthal :) <<---pseudoscience at it's finest

Diamed said...

Supposing your studies were right, who cares? Blacks are the most sexually promiscuous 'race,' as shown by their STD rates, their illegitimacy rates, and how often they rape people. The 'sins' you attest to whites are utterly insignificant in the face of what blacks have done to themselves and others.

Asians and Jews have a slight edge on Whites, and not in all categories. Whites, for instance, are more creative and pioneering than Asians. These differences are negligible in any event, because whites, Jews, and Asians have all proven their ability to produce a modern civilization full of good art, science, and all the comforts of the modern world. These differences are meaningless compared to the difference between all three groups -- and blacks, who can only create Haiti and Zimbabwe.

Intelligence is 80% genetically inherited, as proven by twin studies. Intelligence is what allows a group to live in the modern world, and the lack thereof is what causes people to live in corrupt, criminal, impoverished hellholes. So yes, genetics explains everything important in this world. If the environment were more important than genetics, why is it that giraffes, when put in the right environment, do not outperform humans on IQ tests who are raised in bad environments?

I'm really curious as to how you explain bad giraffe parental upbringing explains the differences in our brains between them and us, since genetics apparently has nothing to do with it.

Anonymous said...

"why is it that giraffes, when put in the right environment, do not outperform humans on IQ tests who are raised in bad environments"<<--- this is what i mean..GIRAFFE's really? you expect to sound logical comparing a giraffe (an animal with no mental capacity ravaling that of the human species) to the rest of humanity?, blacks are obviously intellectually superior to giraffes because unlike a GIRAFEE there have been PLENTY of successful black intellectuals who were able to surmount incredible odds and achieve something worthwhile and added to our history i mean I can name atleast 10 successful black scientists (post affirmative action)...If Intelligence DOES not exist in the black brain than what accounts for these successes in innovation, philosophy, science, medicine etc..

It is because of THESE FEWW!!! that we can't label the black race as "mentally incompetent subhuman homonids" because as history has PROVEN blacks can and have been able to attain success (capable of overcoming socio-economic barriers like any other race, hence proving theyr humanity) and so Induction and overgeneralization are not an objective and logically sound argument in arguing that blacks (all of them) are INCAPABLE and incompetent, at best what you have done is shown that the majority of them Are not up to par with the rest of humanity..

"The 'sins' you attest to whites are utterly insignificant in the face of what blacks have done to themselves and others." <<--- you really need a history lesson, on what your forefathers have and continue to do throughout history ...your ancestors were a bunch of Disease prone (the great plague) nomads, poverty, immorality/homosexuality, savagery, warmongers, rape these are all european attributes and are not isolated to the black populace as you would have us believe

Diamed said...

I just want a straight yes or no answer:

Is the difference between human intelligence and giraffe intelligence due to genetics or environmental upbringing?

If so, does this mean you admit that genetics determines a species' brainpower?

If so, why do you think genetics can't determine the brain power of blacks?

If you admit humans are smarter than giraffes due to differences in human and giraffe genetics, then I don't see why you can't admit the same between whites and blacks.

Neanderthals were also capable of tool making and painting stuff on cave walls. This didn't make them human and it doesn't make blacks human either. It makes them sapient, like many other hominids, monkeys, dolphins, ravens and parrots.

As to whites behaving poorly in the ancient past, the vital difference is that we STOPPED doing that and PROGRESSED into modern civilization, but blacks continue to behave the same as though they were still in the stone age. Why? What is the difference between whites and blacks, that we can evolve but they can't?

Anonymous said...

contd...
"since genetics apparently has nothing to do with it." i don't remmeber mentioning that "GENETICS" is an irrelevant concept with respect to human attributes and intelligence.. genetics accounts for 40% of social conditioning and intelligence, however the OTHER 60% (which you seem to ignore) is environmental my point is you seem to focus on GENETICS to account for ALL social differences w/o taking into account the social FACTORS themselves.....if whites are so vastly superior to the blacks (Genetically) than no black should posess the intelectual aptitude equivalent to whites much less superior to ANY white...case and point let's compare barack obama to say an idiot like BUSH which of the two is more incompetent, the answer is obvious -_-) and in your analysis i see you tend to refrain from using the HISPANICS , they too have a similar IQ, crime stats, and other social factors similar to African americans (and historically they haven't contributed much to science or any social movement and or philosophies of the modern world) are they too Subhuman in your analysis? if not why are the criteria Different in judging these two races? your not fooling anyone here targeting the blacks, you are a white supremacist rallying others against (in your mind atleast) the common ennemy (the Niggers).... as is typical of Pseudoscience material there is nothing objective in your analysis plain and simple...

Anonymous said...

What's the difference between niggers and giraffes?

Giraffes don't ruin the world, destroy neighborhoods just by living in them, increase the crime rate, rape people by force of habit, murder like it's going out of style, fail like there's no tomorrow, abort the English language like a typical nigger woman at an abortion clinic, make people cross to the other side of the road to avoid them, stink so bad that rotting carcasses hold their noses, or screech in civilized public places where quiet is the norm.

- The Realist

Reader from Europe said...

Ok, your article is interesting but I still don´t see why you say blacks aren´t human. At first I have to say, I´m a nationalist from Europe and therefore no "nigger lover", "liberal" etc. and yes, that blacks raise crime statistics is a fact. So no, I´m not a "nigger defender" and I really would wish to send our niggers back to Africa.
However I disagree with a lot of your statements.
About IQ: Yes, blacks have low scores without any doubt. However, what has IQ to do with how good or "civilised" a human(or in your words) humanoid is?
The asians have high IQ, however looking at their history they also committed a lot of atrocities to each other. The asian cruelty is legendary.
Then see the jews, they have high IQ(average around 115), however they don´t use it for good things or improving humans living, they use it to suqeeze the money out of other people and messing up their countries, not in a way like black immigrants to but in a more advanced way, and THAT makes them dangerous to civilisation, more than niggers.
So would you say jews are human or not?
And then the arabs, average IQ of nations with mostly arab population is around 80-85, so on par with the level of american negroes. A lot of arab countries are a mess, dirty roads and houses, poor infrastructure and corrupt governments. Arab immigrants to Europe behave similar to nigger immigrants or niggers in the USA, so rising crime rate, behaving uncivilised and so on. The same things for immigrants from Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan. There might be some of them that reach good degrees at schools or even at universities but majority of them are uneducated scum only wanting to live from white peoples money.
So would you consider them as human or not?
Oh and about bringing up religion, blacks have brought up some religions, while considered primitive it is religion.
What about Islam, it was brought up by people that are "human" to you but it is really questionable if this religion is an advantage for humans. Look at most islamic countries, they are in a shitty condition.

And the story about penis size and relation to intelligence, sounds funny but is just wrong. Scientific researches revealed that the story of blacks having bigger penisses are wrong. Many anti-nigger-sites like Niggermania wrote about this so I wonder why this is brought up here.

Also I wonder why in the USA there are more and more people stating that they are against niggers but go on distance to white people that say the truth about "humans" of other races that are crap. I once stated in an anti-nigger-forum I also dislike arabs and other non-whites living like parasites in Europe, some people said how I can bash "humans" here. Saying that these "humans" behave the same way like niggers wasn´t believed by them.

And at least it would be interesting to know why you also mention aborigines and bushmen in the article. Bushmen may have low IQ but they are not niggers but a different race that is hated by niggers, so the niggers try to kill them. Bushmen are smaller, have overall different look and aren´t a problem like niggers.
Aborigines aren´t niggers either, they may look ugly to us and have also low IQ, however they live in harmony with nature and I haven´t heard that they cause much problems in Australia. However I´m open to new insights about them if someone has a crime statistic from Australia stating that they are a problem, don´t mind showing it to me.

Reader from Europe said...

To sum it up what I wanted to say, "human" is no quality label for people/humanoids. Humans have committed the greatest crimes in their own history, uncountable numbers of wars and destruction of nature.
The biggest danger are not the niggers but the liberals - controlled by jews - in USA and Europe stating that non-whites are equal, races don´t exist and that "we are all human". Their goal is to create a mixed race of negroid and eurasian descent, without identity and easily controlled.

Ancient cultures were mentioned, but what about their downfall?
Ancient Greece was a great contributor to mankind, yes, but they fell down because the old greeks mixed with the people from the areas they conquered. Todays greeks have nothing in common with the ancient greeks, they are a total different people with only a low percentage of old-greek blood. Some islands around greece have maintained their real greek population, blond and tall humans like ancient pictures show.
Todays greeks are a mix race of turkish and slavic ancestry.
The whole country is in a poor condition, corrupted and fucked up.
Same like Egypt, ancient Egypt has nothing in common with todays Egypt. The arabs invaded the country and mixed with the white population, and today this is only an arab country.
The biggest danger to mankind is race mixing, not only a single race.
I wouldn´t consider the white race as superior, they dig their own grave today, and that´s the problem.

Diamed said...

African Americans are 85 IQ only because they're part white. True blacks are 70 IQ, which is far below Arabs, Hispanics, etc.

Intelligence, not morality, is what makes us human. There are moral dogs, but they aren't considered human. Meanwhile there are vicious people who nevertheless acted intelligently and are thus admired to this day -- Genghis Khan, Attilla the Hun, etc. In the end the only thing people care about is intelligence.

You're right that every race and ethnicity has its flaws, but you're missing the relative importance of those flaws. Jews are deceitful, Asians are cruel, whites are dodos, but blacks can't form a civilization.

And I'm not even talking one with cars and airports and computers. I'm saying they can't even form Babylon. They can't match 200 BC Greece or China.

Blacks, if left to their own devices, create an anarchy that can't even support itself economically. There is no law, there is no religion, there is no philosophical system of virtue, there is no society. Somalia, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Detroit, wherever they go all they leave in their wake is ruin. That can't be said of any other group of humans. No matter what flaws they had, they all have a proud legacy of civilization. Cities, empires, cultures, that united together and produced something they could be proud of. That is, to me, such a stark difference that I see no point in classifying blacks with the rest of mankind. They more resemble chimpanzees, who have also never built cities or developed a written language, than the rest of us, who have done all these things long ago.

When you look at genetic differences you come up with the same results. The rest of mankind is ten times more similar genetically to each other than they are to blacks. When genotypes and phenotypes are saying the same thing, why not listen?

Anonymous said...

"Intelligence, not morality, is what makes us human" that right there is priceless, so let me get this i can act like an animal but as long as i have a 90+ (one that is above the African American IQ) I am human right?...blacks had no Empires and culture? what about the Nigger Nubian empire which conquered and occupied early Egypt was that not an empire? if not please define an empire?...

"When you look at genetic differences you come up with the same results?" really? I'd love to see those stats...than why is it whites are genetically more related to blacks than they are to their fellow whites?

Diamed said...

Conquered, not created. Blacks can't do anything when left to their own devices.

And you're simply misunderstanding statistics. There is more individual variation than group variation, but the black-white gap is the group variation + the individual variation, whereas two whites only are as different as their individual variation, thus a random black will always be more genetically distant than a random white.

Anonymous said...

"Conquered, not created. Blacks can't do anything when left to their own devices." how can you conquer something if youve never created anything of your own...I mean they shouldn't have the mental capacity to have a culture much less an empire according to you right?...please elaborate my feeble mind is simply not getting your logic

Anonymous said...

"Blacks, if left to their own devices, create an anarchy that can't even support itself economically" if you can't govern yourself how than are you able to CONQUER an empire like Egypt and control it's economy for generations?.....this is a rather interesting Paradox wouldn't you say?

Anonymous said...

this has been entertaining to read.

every race can out perform another may it be physical or mental/logical...fact Blacks can outperform whites in just about ANY physical activity and hence blacks are physically superior, Fact Asians can outperform whites in critical thinking and are therefore mentally supeior, fact whites can outperform asians and blacks in innovation and are therefore superior innovators...so unless you're an alien (because as a human you fall under one of these groups and are therefore inherently subject to bias in analyzing the human condition) you have no business arguing which attribute(s) is/are objectively superior and which race(s) is/are inferior or superior in relation to the other(s)

racism should be dead by now...its been 200 years allready i think it's time we started EVOLVING don't you? it is only carried on by those who like to moan and bitch and blame others for their incompetence and miserable life (how else can you feel important?).. why ever waste energy towards hate? it only brings stress, I can't immagine how upsetting it must be to see people of color in your neighborhood work place etc... i see a brain hemorrage inbound, you need to go out get some fresh air visit the world (instead of gathering facts from THE INTERNET) get to know people, you'll see that nothing in this world is ever as simple as "white/black"...you may hate me for having black skin hence a "nigger" but i will love you for being human (Off course i Don't expect this to make it on the post) Have a great day Mr Diamed God bless :)

Anonymous said...

The People of the State of California v. George W. Hall or People v. Hall was an appealed murder case in the 1850s in which the California Supreme Court established that Chinese Americans and Chinese immigrants had no rights to testify against white citizens. The opinion was delivered in 1854 by Chief Justice Hugh Murray with the concurrence of Justice J. Heydenfeldt.
The ruling effectively freed Hall, a white man, who had been convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of Ling Sing, a Chinese miner in Nevada County. Three Chinese witnesses had testified to the killing.
The ruling was an odd extension of California Criminal Procedure's existing (1850) exclusion, "No black or mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man." It was held that either "Indian" denoted anyone of the Mongoloid race or that "black" applied to anyone not white.
The ruling effectively made white violence against Chinese Americans unprosecutable, arguably leading to more intense white-on-Chinese race riots, such as the 1877 San Francisco riot....that right there is Racism at it's finest, so a couple of decades ago you white supremacists called us "Yellow monkeys" (Blacks=any nonwhite person) and now you acknowledge us as "non-black" doesn't that in itself Prove that RACE is INDEED a social construct and not a Biological one? I mean did we (asians) biologically evolved since 1850 in terms of phenotype and genotypes?...your definitions of "black" seem to keep changing as the years go on, Furthermore what is "black" in the first place obviously color of the skin never had anything to do with it.

Diamed said...

The state of civilization in East Asia was woefully inferior to the USA at the time, so it's no wonder people were racist against Chinese. Nowadays we realize those views were mistaken, due to how much progress Asia has made over the last century. In my view, Japan is the best country and Japanese the best people on Earth. But I wouldn't have believed that in 1840, I would have laughed such a concept out of the courtroom.

Now look at blacks. They had their chance, and they blew it. Previously people were all racist against blacks, based on the state of their pathetic civilization, both at home and abroad. But various liberals said this was unfair and once blacks were given a helping hand they would immediately become 'whites with dark skin.' What did they do in the last half century?

They absorbed trillions of dollars of welfare, went on a crime spree that has killed more people than nearly any war in US history, and have ruined some of the most prosperous, dynamic cities in the world -- Detroit, New Orleans, Chicago, it's the same story everywhere they go. Meanwhile they still haven't produced a single livable country in Africa, won a single Nobel prize in science or a single Fields medal in Math, made a single important invention on level with the airplane or radio, in short, they've done nothing.

Science is about reviewing hypothesis in the light of further data. In one case science proved racism against Asians to be wrong, in light of the Shanghai skyline. In another case science proved racism against blacks to be right, in light of the hovels of Haiti. Now do you get it?

Anonymous said...

"inst blacks to be right, in light of the hovels of Haiti. Now do you get it?" you seem to be speaking of haiti as if you've been there before? how can you judge something you haven't yet experienced....furthermore have you taken a History course on haiti? you seem to refer to it and Zimbabwe for your model "black countries" in which the blacks fail....who died and gave you your internet Phd in haitian historian? furthermore you still haven't answered my questions if RACE is biological like you say, than why does it keep changing...in one of your posts you seem to claim the ethiopians and dominicans "aren't actually black"... I mean what constitues a black person? what is black? and what is "non-black"?.

Diamed said...

The pure black race, unmixed with any other group, can be found in places like Haiti and Zimbabwe. Blacks who have mixed with other races, like Arabs in Ethiopia, whites among African Americans, or Dominicans who are half white or half subcontinental Indian, I don't remember right now, can all behave better than pure blacks because they aren't purely black. But whatever is bad about those countries is the fault of the black portion of their genes, whereas anything good is the responsibility of their non-black portions.

To establish racial equality, blacks need to prove that their unmixed bloodline is equal to everyone else, not that their mixed bloodlines are somewhat less terrible than average.

Race is a biological reality, by looking at people's genes you can 100% know what race they are. However, where you draw the lines for each racial category are arbitrary. Is Obama black or white? The biological reality is that he is half black and half white. Categories obviously become messy when you try to oversimplify and assign each person on Earth to a specific race. This makes race difficult to discuss in edge cases, like half-breed Dominicans, but not in the least difficult to talk about when we're talking about Haitians, who massacred all non-blacks and even all mixed blacks on the island, and therefore have preserved themselves as a perfect specimen for black racial studies.

I don't need to directly go somewhere to learn about it. There's these wonderful things called books, newspaper articles, and photographs that allow people to learn about things from afar. You should try them some time.

If you think Haiti is not one of the worst places on Earth, then you'd be disagreeing with the CIA World Factbook, which has all the relevant statistics about every country readily at hand. You could always take up your quarrel with them.

Anonymous said...

Actually statistically African americans behave worst than "pure" blooded Subsaharan Africans...okay so african americans aren't actually "black" according to your deffinition? so why are they the Deliberate Target of your study (have you been to mexico? or any latin and or central american country thecrime rate " or social behavior" is similar if not worst than black crimes here in the states...they have gangs the size of an army down in mexico not one day goes by without a beheading, drug violence rape etc.. my question is why are the "African Americans" the specific target of your program?...interesting you ignore the hispanic which is slowly becoming the majority in this country, I see politics at play here

Diamed said...

African Americans are around 85% black, 15% white. Obviously it varies by the individual. They are still blacks. But if it so happens that one of them is good, you can bet it's because of their white admixture.

As I've said before, hispanic crime tends to be purposeful and not directed towards innocents. Black crime however specifically targets random innocent strangers, for no reason but the sadistic pleasure of harming others, and is thus far more dangerous to innocent strangers than hispanic gang or drug wars.

Anonymous said...

So as long as the crime has an economic motive it is okay right?...interesting we'll see your opinion in 2050 :)

Anonymous said...

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/bank-crime-statistics-2011/bank-crime-statistics-2011

surprise surprise whitey is catching up :)

Anonymous said...

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/table-43/10tbl43a.xls

seems to me you whites and blacks are closing the gap in crime stats, and yeah us asians allways have the lowest crime stat rates :)...however it seems that you whites have been getting ahead in serial and commercial crimes as of late

Anonymous said...

I agree fully with this author ... and a lot of white people are so ignorant of the facts ... they practically are blind to what is obvious ... but, eventually, it will all blow up and it might be to late to spread this industrial disease ...

Diamed said...

http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=5230

The only objection people ever managed to make against Rushton's scientific findings in all these hundreds of comments is they thought it was 'absurd' to imagine that penis length varied inversely to intelligence. Simply by stating that Rushton once said this, they thought it could discredit his endless findings in other fields as well. And yet, here is proof that what he said about penis size was true, just like everything else he's ever said.

If you click on the link, you'll get a color coded map of the world by penis size. The biggest dicks on Earth come from the Congo and Ghana. The smallest are in China and Japan. Whites fall somewhere in between. What do you know, it's the exact inverse of IQ scores.

Here is the article that goes with the map:

http://translate.google.com/translate?act=url&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://www.bild.de/ratgeber/2012/brust/busen-weltkarte-russland-skandinavien-ueber-d-koerbchen-23808826.bild.html

Rushton -- right on penises, and right on intelligence.

Anonymous said...

why Apartheird Fail in South Africa?...unlike their American predecessors they failed to successfully apply the "DIVIDE and CCONQUER" method we see in use here in this article, which is why slavery and White supremacy has been so successful here in America for 200 years and counting.

A significant proportion of slaves imported into the Cape were from India, including modern Bangladesh (Asians? Gasps!? but how? aren't we humans?). these slaves quickly integrated with the rest of the Cape population, being subsumed into the wider "Cape Coloured" and Cape Malay identities.During ideological apartheid from 1948 to 1994, Indians were called, and often voluntarily accepted, terms that ranged from "Black" to "Asians" to "Indians." Some citizens believed that these terms were improvements on the negatively defined identity of "NON-WHITE" (Epic Fail to keep them above and separate from the blacks with the "non-black" label), which was their previous status. Politically conscious and nationalistic Indian South Africans wanted to show both their heritage and their local roots. Increasingly they self-identified as "African", "Black" (interests of these groups became the same? surely we can't have that can we?), "South African" and, when necessary, "Indian South Africans".

This "BLACK" vs "non-black" BS you have going on here is nothing we haven't seen before (and clearly I posited a question a couple of days earlier in which you seemed to have a bit of trouble defining what "black" is from a white supremacist POV)...simple American covert racist tactic of Keeping "non-white" interests VASTLY different (so they hate themselves) while they "look-up" to their white counter parts...why else put the blacks at the bottom of the food chain and everybody else falls in the middle below whites? am I right or am I right?... why else would you consider a bunch of mullato Hispanics (ie: Dominicans) Humans when they share such a great genetic lineage to subsaharan Africans with obvious negroid phenotypes?(for the most part)...
while the African Americans are labeled "subhuman" (whom are partially white according to you)

Anonymous said...

"If you click on the link, you'll get a color coded map of the world by penis size. The biggest dicks on Earth come from the Congo and Ghana. The smallest are in China and Japan. Whites fall somewhere in between. What do you know, it's the exact inverse of IQ scores."
actually the biggest dicks on earth come from: Venezuella, Columbia, Ecuador, Congo and Ghana <<--- further proof of the divide and conquer tactics. The proof is in the pudding, I rest my case!!! :)

Diamed said...

Your facts are off. If you read the accompanying article, it clearly says Ghana and Congo have the largest penis size, and that other African countries would have also scored well above the likes of Venezuela, but no data was collected on those countries so they couldn't be put into the database. The reason why Venezuela came in third is because not enough samples were taken from Africa, that's all.

Furthermore, you ignore the rest of the data in the links that clearly show that whites have an average penis size and Asians have the smallest, in perfect accordance with Rushton's observation that penis size varies inversely to IQ. Instead you immediately look for facts that are outliers and go against the pattern, when any fair observer would count those as just meaningless exceptions and admit the global average supports Rushton's comments. It's like if you can just find one exception an entire pattern can be undone, but that just isn't how facts or statistics work. One exception proves that the correlation isn't the sole determining factor -- it doesn't prove that it isn't an important determining factor, which is all that is necessary for science to take note of or politics to act upon.

Anonymous said...

This comment is mainly geared toward the individual lumping together Indians and even people from Bangladesh with people in Apartheid ridden South Africa. There were "no" people from Bangladesh brought to South Africa. People from India were brought as indentured servants. Do you know that Irish, German and other eastern Europeans sold themselves as indentured servants after coming to America trying to get a job in the beginning times of this country? There are indentured servants currently working in many countries as of now. People vastly are poor and without opportunities in majority of the countries. That leads them to indentured servitude. When you use a credit card and can't pay it off, are you not becoming an indentured servant? I can go on and on forever. The fact that you are trying to mix people of different colors and creeds with the blacks show your agenda very well. It is a fact that people belong to different groups behavior wise and genetically. There is no strict line between white and non white. Now, whites have done horrendous things. The Indians and others don't necessarily want to become "white". Whites were barbarians when India produced literature and sophisticated civilizations. But the fact is that even barbarians had honor, trust and respect for each other when the society was "stable". The key word is "stable". Not being able to live peacefully in a stable society shows severe detachment from reality and how the world is. Please stop trying to lump others who supposedly are victims of "white supremacist" agenda with blacks. Whites killed each other in the millions, some supremacy. See blackness is not bad, whiteness is not good. What is good is proper way to live in a society with others in it and not harming each other. You can be blue for all a decent person could care. But if a certain group continuously fit the stereotype through hundreds of years of recorded history, then one needs to look into it and admit what is right. By the way, Uganda's ruthless dictator misplaced many Indians who have lived there for generations. When the blacks had power, it was way worse than when the whites had it. Again, do not ever lump anyone with blacks trying to get an edge with a stupid argument.

For Diamed, you mentioned that it is intelligence that makes us human, not morality. That is just wrong. This is a matter of another discussion but without morality and only with intelligence alone we would not have survived to begin with and by now would have eliminated each other. What's up with reporting "penis sizes"? Do you really want to display your ulterior motive if there is any this way? Correlation does not imply causation buddy. Having a large penis does not make you more likely to commit crime albeit just one of the factors. I don't know about your background. But take some courses in statistics and learn the scientific method well.

Finally, as I mentioned already, it is morality and intelligence,not intelligence alone that make us human. And no I am not Indian or the like.

Diamed said...

You have to look at that statement in context. Obviously a computer, however intelligent, wouldn't be considered a 'person.' I didn't mean to say intelligent aliens were in fact human beings either. But the point I was making is that there have been very immoral people who nevertheless didn't act like baboons. The immorality of Genghis Khan is on a completely different, more sophisticated, and more civilized level than the immorality of a bunch of blacks sucker punching an 85 year old woman for fun.

It's a false comparison when I mention packs of feral savages raping infants, and then someone brings up Christopher Columbus or something on the other side. If they can't see the difference between these two 'agents of evil' then they just aren't trying hard enough.

There is no ulterior motive, I just want to make clear for the record that Rushton is not some sort of crazy person, as was previously asserted, simply because he told the truth about race differences in male genitalia. It is unclear why there is such a relationship, but the fact is that there IS one, so it's only rational to suppose there is a causative link between the two. The worst accusation anyone has been able to make against Rushton's science is that he made a factually true statement about a naughty subject. I mean, really? Come on.

Anonymous said...

As a Racist I find this work utterly paradoxical and quite frankly hilarious. check this out, Black people have been on the planet for MILLIONS of years while you devils have only been here what 40,000 years?. we had great civilizations millions of years before you devils even existed. before you beasts came from the caves, the world was at peace but once you found out the earth was round (something we taught you) you and your sadistic ideals spread like cancer causing death where ever you went. I find it Ironic that a descendent of a Neanderthal, Yeah know your history fool, questions the African people's humanity (from which The human Race originated from). your people are alien to this planet & that’s why you're the only race that’s going EXTINCT!! (i Say let nature take it's course and eliminate your feeble and inferior race). your people have been in worldwide control for close to a hundred years & look at the planet's condition under your rule (Global warming, energy crisis, the very planet Is Dying from your so called "Innovations"). LOL, you pig skin devils are so funny thinking yourselves our superiors when we both know who is more aptly built for the “natural” world. We don't need you, you never should have set foot in Africa to begin with, and WE are waiting for you to die out & we will have a big celebration.

~Your Friendly Neighborhood Black Racist!!~

Anonymous said...

It’s interesting that African immigrants have IQ’s in the 105-110 range, how would you explain this phenomenon?. and they on average tend to behave better than African Americans, why is that?. I am curious to hear an explanation to this

Anonymous said...

Of course if you compare motivated and culturally healthy africans to lazy and culturally corrupted aframs or complacent american whites you will get that the africans will do better. This goes back to the fact that races are not inherently better or worse but just seem to have inherent natures that naturally drives them to different life objectives.

Africans if left alone would never create european culture. They are naturally driven to a different life perception. Now if you indoctrinate them into european culture they can be as good as anyone else who learns how to get by on that enviroment. All of this has to do more with motivation, family education and cultural standarts. Not all african inmigrants will do equally on western universities, there has to be a certain amount of prequisites met on the individual. A guy that like "gangsta" culture, does drugs everyday and has a violent nature won´t meet this criteria and wont thrive under these circumstances.

If it wasnt for the widespread toxic culture in african americans for example, blacks in america would surely do much better. In the UK you can see more cases of culturally adapted blacks, who even talk undistinguishably from a white brit, and you can see they do as well as a regular brit in their personal lives. It doesnt have to do with race or with IQ, it has all to do with culture and the education the individual got from his/her family when growing up. The reason why people tend to view subsaharian blacks as less evolved it´s because before having contact with europe they as a people hadnt developed a civilization similar to the european one, and europeans see anyone who doesnt have the wheel and a written language automatically as less evolved. I tend to disagree with this view, I believe that black africans had their enviroment and were fulfilling their natural tendencies, if subsaharian blacks would have been left alone they would be thriving nowdays, just probably not in the same way WE consider thriving.

Diamed said...

Selection bias. Immigrants from overseas (unlike say, illegal Mexican immigrants who just have to walk across the border) tend to be the most exceptional members of their race, either in terms of ability or drive. Africa is an enormous continent with hundreds of millions of blacks to choose from, of course we can find a small crop of 105-110 IQ blacks from a sample of that magnitude.

But even out of a billion blacks, not a single one has managed to make an important invention, a nobel prize winning discovery in the sciences, or a fields medal in math. So there is a limit to even careful sifting when it comes to black excellence.

Diamed said...

http://www.vdare.com/articles/j-philippe-rushton-says-color-may-be-more-than-skin-deep

Just today Rushton has done another bang-up job of explaining why blacks suck. I don't see how anyone can possibly debate such a strong series of facts. How do they maintain their illusions any longer?

Anonymous said...

"of course we can find a small crop of 105-110 IQ blacks from a sample of that magnitude." but according to you intelligence does not exist in the black brain, isn't the black gene inherently inferior and therefore we shouldn't find any differences in IQ such as this between healthier and wealthier africans and the general masses. This PROVES that upbringing (environment/education) influence intelligence, what other explanation is there?.

Diamed said...

According to not really me, but to Lynn's Wealth and IQ of Nations, black African IQ is a bell curve centered around 70 IQ, which is borderline retarded. This means that half of black Africans are smarter than this, and half are dumber. Every 15 IQ points puts you a standard deviation away from this mean. The black Africans you are speaking of are three standard deviations above the mean, which would be the top .3% of black Africans. In a population of one billion Africans, therefore, there should be 3 million with the high IQ scores you speak of. Just because the average black is retarded doesn't mean every single black is retarded. What it does mean, though, is not a single black can reach the level of Newton or Einstein. Or at the very least, such a black is so rare as to have never yet occurred in history. Due to this lack of true geniuses, blacks can neither create a civilization, like the geniuses in other races did (Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, Aristotle), nor maintain civilizations that were created by wiser men than they.

It takes a lot of smart people just to remember how to make a fire. In Tazmania, the population of intelligent people fell so low that they lost the ability to make fires. Likewise, in Detroit, the black population has lost the ability to keep the city lit, and is now having to remove the light bulbs from half of the city streets. You need a sizable smart fraction to maintain a technological society -- and the black smart fraction is just too weak and too small to carry the load the rest of their racial colleagues put upon them.

I really feel sorry for these blacks, because another truth haunts their steps -- regression to the mean. When you are such an aberrant genetic sample (the top .3%), it's due to a lucky collection of all the intelligence genes both your parents happened to have, plus probably some lucky new mutations that only you possess. When you have kids, though, they only inherit half of your genes -- odds are they won't get all of your intelligence genes, or any of your beneficial mutations, and as a result the children of these brilliant blacks will be as stupid as ever.

For this reason, children of the most affluent blacks in America score lower on their SAT tests than the children of the most impoverished white Americans. Successful blacks only last a generation, but high IQ non-blacks last forever, because their races always perform at that higher mean, and therefore don't lose the progress their genome has made each new iteration.

Even if a smart black looks equal to a smart white, it's an illusion because the children of said smart black will be far worse than the children of said smart white. The difference in overall genetic quality will tell over multiple generations, even if there's no discernible difference in a single generation. Which is a very good reason to Not judge people as individuals, but instead look at them as members of a larger group, and judge them by their group averages instead. If you bred with one of these exceptional blacks with the expectation that your children would be as good as their father, you'd be in for a rude awakening.

Anonymous said...

the assertion that there is no simple racial binary of white vs. black, with brown or “yellow” falling somewhere in between is correct. However, racism is racism, no matter whom it is against and that it should be fought on principle alone, whatever shape or form it takes. Nakagawa regards it to be an issue of whites in power, vs. all nonwhites collectively, which is to deny the prevalence of racism in all other ethnicities/cultures. Asians are racist against blacks, blacks against whites, light-skinned South Asians against darker skinned South Asians, Hispanics against other minorities, the Chinese hate the Japanese, etc. Decentralized racism has no middle ground. Racism seems to be ingrained in human nature.There is even suggestion of a racism gene.

White racial supremacist concepts today are very strongly supported by two pillars: biblical and scientific.

Scientific racism is based on a hierarchical system, which originated with the Systema Naturae established by the Swede, Carl Linnaeus, in 1735. He gave racism a scientific basis, by assigning specific characteristics and abilities to races (http://en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​Scientific_racism#Carl_Linn​aeus). These ideas were further developed by racial anthropologists into polygenism–the idea that humans are descended from separate lineages (NOT just from “Adam and Eve”). When Darwin came along and proposed monogeny (that we are all descended from the same lineage), his ideas were reverted to polygenism, and developed into social Darwinism, which alongside religious ideas of Christianizing the pagans, was used to justify colonialism, racial hygiene, eugenics, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, etc. Under the auspices of such “scientific” thinking, there was most definitely a hierarchy with whites on top and blacks at the bottom. Asians for example, were somewhat better respected for having had “civilization” for thousands of years, compared to Africans, who were nothing but savages, and all that BS…

Biblical racism has its roots in the story of the sons of Noah: Japheth (who became the father of European tribes), Shem (who became father of Asians and Jews and Arabs, etc) and Ham (who became father of African peoples). Ham supposedly did something bad to Noah and was cursed, while Japheth was blessed and Shem was sort of “tolerated.” In Genesis 9:27, it states that “God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” Europeans used this as a scriptural basis to justify colonialism and slavery. It gave birth to ideas such as the Manifest Destiny of whites (http://en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/Manifest_destiny).

If not for the marriage of scientific racism and biblical racism, colonialism and slavery could not have been implemented and current day racial tensions in the US would not be what they are. And both scientific racism and biblical racism support a hierarchy or races.

Historically, how this has played out in the US is that Asians were given a form of tentative citizenship. They were tolerated as long as they paid in many cases four to six times as much taxes, as long as they kept quiet and didn’t testify in court about racial atrocities committed against them, and as long as they didn’t own any properties, and as long as they kept a low profile and their numbers and immigration were curbed. Specific anti-Chinese laws were enacted in the US to enforce all of the above. This has some manifest effects on relationships today. (See table http://www.zakkeith.com/​articles,blogs,forums/​US-interracial-demographics​.gif). If anything, the table shows that Asians are at the bottom of the social hierarchy in aspects such as love and acceptance.

All this to say, there most definitely is racial heirarchy at play in racism, and that it’s not just about whites vs. all nonwhites collectively.

Anonymous said...

the following are reasons why I will ALLWAYS oppose Racism especially the most intrusive kind "White supremacy":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkGpfTkcNw8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi4YlKRKDq8&feature=related

http://newzeelend.wordpress.com/category/korean-student/

^^ ^^^
Psychopathic Killer kiwi with the IQ of a Tapeworm

Flewellen Finally Admits to Murdering Korean Student Jae Hyeon Kim in 2003
NZ’s White Pride: Shannon Brent Flewellen, is tattooed neck-to-butt-wide. He chopped off the head of an Asian student with a spade in 2003.

Diamed this is the work of your White Brothers as a white supremacist and racist what are your thoughts on this?

Diamed said...

There are lone nuts and idiots representing every ideological group and across the entire spectrum of politics, religion, and philosophy. They in no way represent, or discredit, the rest of their group. In fact, there are far more eco-terrorists than racist terrorists, and Islamic terrorists trump both groups by orders of magnitude.

The question you should really be asking yourself is how many lives could be saved every year if we had proper policies in place to prevent black crime? What about the 3,000 white farmers in South Africa who have been tortured, raped, and murdered since the end of Apartheid? That's 3,000 people horrifically killed due to the lack of racism and white supremacy. And all you have is one person killed due to it? Do the math yourself.

Anonymous said...

history speaks for itself between 5-6 Million JEWS that (MILLIONS) died because of White Supremacy Ideologies, do the math yourself buddy. when you entertain ideas of superior v inferior groups you are essentially creating breeding grounds for this kind of Lunacy, history has proven that there are more "Lunatics" in this world than there are "normal functioning" law abiding citizens.

Diamed said...

100 million people died as a result of the equalitarian doctrine of communism. So I guess superior vs. inferior thinking would save us 94 million lives, huh?

Anonymous said...

"That's 3,000 people horrifically killed due to the lack of racism and white supremacy. "
actually if they are targeted because of their race (for being white) by the blacks, than that is RACISM!!. You yourself just proved the adverse effects of Racism!!! it is never "Virtuous" to oppress, harass and abuse any living thing much less another human being because of color,ethnicity, race, religion or creed!!. if these people are indeed Inferior wouldn't the logical thing to do is "LEAVE THEM ALONE" and let them run themselves into oblivion?.
you paint the white race as this elite, enlightened, benevolent, civilized, virtuous, righteous, above all that is unpure, supreme being. I have provided you a site FULL of the consequences of such "superior than though" ideals, you can see these patterns occuring ALL OVER europe. I have family and friends living there and so I hear about these sort of things very often. Although Blacks maybe the Fulcrum of "American" White supremacist racism (for the most part),however on a global perspective white Europeans still have this "white" v "non-white" mentality and they too are adept participants in these "amoral" senseless sins you attest to the Negro. as such, you and your race (any race/groups of people for that matter) should stop acting as the world police, judging/deciding what people are worth, who died and made you racist God(s)?


"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (Matt 7:3-5 NIV)

Judgement invites Judgement my friend

Anonymous said...

The niggers in Africa are dumb, that is without question, but those in America are the dumbest niggers of all. Let me explain.

1. When they were captured as P.O.W.s by other niggers in Africa and sold as slaves, they were obviously dumber, slower and inferior to the victorious niggers. They wound up here.

2. When tribal chiefs didn't like certain niggers in his tribe, he would sell them into slavery. That means we got the most undesirable niggers of all.

3. When people caught niggers and brought them here, we got the slowest and dumbest niggers, because they couldn't even outrun Spaniards and British guys.

So, in summary, we got the most recalcitrant, undesirable, slow and stupid niggers in Africa.

- The Realist

Diamed said...

Though amusing, this flies in the face of our IQ testing.

Anonymous said...

Well said. Blacks are the product of the devil to remind us that life is always the struggle between good and evil.

Anonymous said...

Meanwhile in Africa

http://www.fxfowle.com/projects/retail/addis-ababa-exhibition-center.php

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=40560118

http://ethiopianreview.com/album/displayimage.php?album=59&pos=75

as an ethiopian I am proud to say that we are the only Subsaharan african nation to have escaped foreign rule (colonialism) Of course you can't expect beautiful places like these to make it on the mass media (it deters non-profit charities from cashing in on all that international "aid")....although that is not to say poverty is non-existent, which would of course be the greatest lie ever told, because you can find poverty just about anywhere you point to on the map be it Canada, chile, haiti, United states, China, Japan, India etc... Furthermore If you've been keeping up with current events, as I'm sure you have been because in Circumspection you do appear to be a more "enlightened" racist from my observation, you therefore should know that the GDP of Many "black" African Nations have been Steadily increasing at the turn of the century. I'm going to stick my neck out and say that Coincidentally the black people are doing relatively "better" because of the European economic crisis (That pretty much says it all). The point is there are all the comforts of modern day civilization in just about anywhere on every corner of the globe IE: skyscrapers, schools, businesses, hotels, computer tech, higher education etc.. therefore your claims that we "Black Africans" and the black race in its entirety, are useless inherently inferior animals is a little outlandish to say the least. from reading your work you seem like a very bright and intelligent man, I sincerely hope you come to see the world differently one day through more exposure.

Diamed said...

Ethiopia's per capita GDP, according to the CIA world factbook,

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html?countryName=Ethiopia&countryCode=et&regionCode=afr&rank=212#et,

is $1,100, and that's in purchasing power parity terms. This means that they're exactly as poor as an American trying to get by on $1,100 a year in America.

Ethiopia ranks 212th in per capita GDP out of 226 total entries in the whole world. Every other nation even poorer than Ethiopia is also in Africa, except for war-torn Afghanistan which Ethiopia barely nudges out. If Ethiopia is supposed to be proof of black equality, I'm worried what evidence would be necessary to discover black inequality.

It's kind of you to compliment me even though I'm so abusive to your people though. Even if your argument that Ethiopia's poverty is no worse than Europe's is absurd, you at least made it like a gentleman.

Diamed said...

If you don't like the example of dogs and wolves, here's another example of two scientifically classified separate species interbreeding and producing viable offspring:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0723/Polar-bears-brown-bears-interbred-during-warm-periods.-Is-it-happening-again-video

"Recently, wild hybrids and even second-generation offspring have been documented in the Northern Beaufort Sea of Arctic Canada where the ranges of brown bears and [polar bears] appear to overlap, perhaps as a recent response to climatic changes," they write. [Album: 8 Bizarre Hybrid Animals]

"Polar bears' past may echo their future, indicates a genetic study that finds the white-furred, sea ice-dwelling bears interbred with brown bears long after the two species separated as much as 5 million years ago."

Yet again, mainstream newspapers and scientists report, without a qualm or a blink of the eye, that two distinct, separate species can interbreed and produce not just sterile offspring, but second generation offspring, which means viable offspring. If Polar Bears and Brown Bears are two different species, why can't whites and blacks be?

Surely the differences between whites and blacks are far more severe than polar bears and brown bears. Polar bears and brown bears can interbreed, and so can we, but that doesn't make them the same species, so why should that make us the same species? Inquiring minds want to know.

http://www.kidsbutterfly.org/faq/general/2

There are 12-15,000 species of butterflies and 150-250,000 species of moths.

200,000 different species of moths. Can someone please explain to me how it is possible that all 200,000 species of moths are more different from each other in appearance, behavior, personality, intelligence, etc than blacks are from whites? I would like to know why scientists felt the need to create 200,000 species just to explain all the variations between moths, all of which have four wings and flap around just like any other moth, but didn't see the need to create even two species of hominids, which vary more from each other than night varies from day or protons do from electrons.

This smacks of a double standard. What do scientists not want to tell us about variations between the races? Why 200,000 species of moths and one race, the human race? It just doesn't compute.

Anonymous said...

I was brought here through an email on Facebook. this is a Very good topic, it is truly unfortunate that most whites and other racists can't muster the strength to openly express their views like you do and so I find that commendable. My "compliment" was not meant to inflate your ego, but as a rational adult I simply give credit where it is due. I believe those who let themselves believe that the race of an individual is indicative to some predetermined conclusion are denying themselves a world of possibilities. Everyone has something great to offer that has nothing to do with race.

By taking someone's opinion with a grain of salt because they are not of a specific race is stupid on a monumental scale, and you unlike most racists seem capable of at least processing and assessing the other side to the argument and so I admire that quality, which is also atypical of the average everyday racist. They are truly denying themselves a blessing and closing their ears to a universe of insight. Why would someone even consider the race of an individual?

I personally believe a lot of this type of behavior comes from a false sense of pride. Believing that theirs is the superior race. Why would someone have this attitude? perhaps upbringing and a lack of exposure?. We are all human in the end and will meet the same maker.


I only mentioned Ethiopia because that is where I am from, and so I am more familiar with Ethiopian culture, economy etc..I have looked at the site you provided and it has proven quite insightful, though it appears that you misunderstood my argument. I wasn't saying that Ethiopia is THE "model" black country/nation, I was simply implying that we too are capable of pursuing the finer things in life, but there are plenty of black African nations such as Jamaica, Curacao, Barbados with a $23,700 GDP on a purchasing power parity as you pointed out in the link above. I have read some of your other blogs you seem educated and intelligent, and so I think your time would be better spent using some of that brain power for a good cause, we don't have to agree on things but we can most certainly have respect for each other at the very least.

Anonymous said...

Diamed,

The double standard which doesn't compute of which you speak regarding scientists not describing the differences between humans and niggers might be explained in this way.

Scientists are not following scientific method when dealing with niggers. Niggers are controlling their minds, their lives, their science and their livelihoods. Congratulations, scientists. You have lost all respectability.

- The Realist

Anonymous said...

Hey diamed, Blacks don't have the lowest IQ in the world, I am black and 15 years old, but already in University, I also wrote the SAT and scored above 1,600 points on my first try and I only studied for less than a week, I am also from South Africa. Here, in South Africa, I have never heard of a white person going to University at the age of 15, yet when I told them I was 15 years old they were astonished.

Anonymous said...

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 910,200 of the men and women behind bars last year were black, 777,500 were white and 395,400 were Hispanic.

In 1997, about 9 percent of the black population in the U.S. was under some form of correctional supervision compared to 2 percent of the white population and over 1 percent of other races.

Blacks were two times more likely than Hispanics and five times more likely than whites to be in jail. But those numbers count only those who were jailed for a crime. In 2003, more than twice as many whites as blacks were arrested and charged with a crime, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports.Of 9.5 million offenses charged, 6.7 million whites were arrested, compared to 2.5 million blacks.The most common crimes were drug abuse violations, resulting in arrest of 770,430 whites and 381,006 blacks.

Whites were far more likely to be arrested driving under the influence. Of 998,035 total offenses, 877,810 of those arrested where whites.

Blacks, meanwhile, were more than twice as likely as whites to be arrested for gambling, 5,153 to 1,964.

And while blacks comprise about 13 percent of the population, they were charged with most of the robberies, 40,993 compared to 33,070 for whites, and nearly as many homicides--4,395 black and 4,454 white.The U.S. Census Bureau reports that in 2010 the median income for non-Hispanic white households in 2010 was $54,620; The median income of black households in the United States in 2010 on the other hand was $32,068 so it is no surprise that the "poorer" group would do commit more robberies, you don't need science for that it is simple basic logic from an objective view point.

Whites outnumbered blacks about 2-1 in arrests for other crimes, including rape (11,766-6,114), aggravated assault (203,076-103,697), burglary (143,889-103,697) and larcey/theft (556,215-233,806.)

Whites also were most often arrested for motor vehicle theft, arson, other assaults, fraud, embezzlement, dealing in stolen property, vandalism, weapons charges, prostitution, sex offenses, crimes against families and children, liquor laws, drunkenness, disorderly conduct, vagrancy, curfew and loitering, suspicion, as runaways and all other offenses not including traffic.

instead of asking what percentage of blacks commit crimes. the real question should be what percentage of blacks commit "Violent Crimes", a college course on statistics is in order here it would seem

Anonymous said...

amazingly written, as a historian i can back up nearly all your claims with endless evidence, these 1% DNA difference comments have never read the bell curve and are scared of having to except the idea we are all different, every last human and proto-human, as i call them now a days, no matter how polite, how filled your argument is with its relations to history art and science and its beautiful anti PC straight forward approach, people too scared to see the truth in their naive crystal palace utopia minds unable to make sense of all before them, will hound you in the gross fashion in witch they have, bravo good sir or madam for your bold declaration to truth and the great western and eastern civilizations

Anonymous said...

Oh Please!!! White America has known for years that African Americans have made major contributions to the founding and development of this country. The number of patents held by African Americans,yeah the Niggers you hate are infact innovative, particularly considering the enslavement period, is a testiment to their creativeness and humanity. Most of the information related to the contributions of African Americans is known, but America refuse to place this information within school's history books. Why? because knowledge is power,and power is status, and status is freedom, how else can we perpetually keep this group (and only this group) disenfranchised and hated by the rest of the world?.

White supremacy is a worldwide system of white racism, and unfortunately most people are unaware of this. How do you explain that the recent images (particularly the last 800 years)of GOD are white? Is GOD white? Some of you might be familiar with some events in New Jersey where GOD was depicted as black. The town nearly exploded haa!!!....
Africa is acknowledged to have the largest quantities of minerals resources, including gold, diamonds, uranium, coper, and many others. I believe all of them are under the control of colonial powers.

Americans or people who claim to be white have a difficult time whenever they are not in control of economies, inferiority complex? what is the source of this nameless fear?. Sometimes its funny listening to the denials of whites. In America's urban areas, often the majority population is black. Whites see nothing wrong or strange with the majority of the jobs (particularly the well paying jobs) being in the hands of whites. In white communities blacks job holders are almost rare.Hopefully, Americans will get to the place where they can confront themselves and their history.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkWiFImjkpY

I would love to see a 5 year old monkey or subhuman perform amazing music like this. If Blacks are indeed "sub" humans what accounts for their continuous innovations in music ie: Jazz, Blues, Rock and roll etc.. they had their culture taken away and they still manage to "innovate" "immagine" and create beautiful music like this? and have such an impact on the world (you can find Jazz, Blues, Pop music just about in every corner of the globe). for a bunch of animals they sure have an impact on the world, and perhaps the only non-white minority to have such an impact on history wouldn't you agree?

Anonymous said...

http://www.blackcelebkids.com/2009/03/upcominglewis-warren-jr-piano-prodigy/

here is another (this one plays Classical Baroque style Music).Lewis Warren Jr. is an 11-year old piano prodigy. He first started playing the piano when he was 3-years old and by the age of 5, he had composed many of his own songs. Lewis has performed in several piano competitions and recitals both nationally and internationally. If you can find me an example of a subhuman/animal doing great things such as this , you will have unequivocally convince that blacks are indeed Mindless, sadistic subhuman animals ...funny thing about generalizations is you only need One example to disprove them, you might want to try a more "deductive" form of argumentation. :)

Artur said...

I think it is very generous of you to patiently and cogently answer many of the clearly not-too-bright Bellcurvious's (Bellcurvii?) who are writing to you on this fascinating thread.

What is obvious is that the majority of the negroes (negrii?) are simply not operating on the same plain of intellect as you, they are in the basement and you are in the penthouse, but they are blind to this natural configuration. It is known at the Dunning Kruger effect.

Translation: Blacks are often too stupid to understand that the vast majority of those (non-blacks) around them are far smarter than they. This is one of the reasons I suspect that Negrii have the highest levels of self esteem of all races.

I read literally every comment in this three-year-old thread. Fascinating and excellent stuff, Sir. Right up there I put it with erectuswalksamongst.us.

Sincerely,

- Arturo

crimesofthetimes.com

GayProdigy said...

You all are very ignorant, but the sad thing that you all think you're so smart, using science and politics to justify an issue that beautiful 'White America' started. I am a black student at Juilliard and I also graduated from The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts and Humanities where I played cello, took all advance classes ending with a cumulative GPA of 4.3. Vocabulary is the least of my accomplishments. ..Now on to your superfluous stats and facts. The majority of your biased statements emanates to slavery. With slavery, the white man took away African-‘American's’ language, education, strength of character, and morality. We were forced into a barbaric temperament (very similar to whites who can't seem to recognize that they aren't the only race that exists….and so fights with others and forces them through brutality and manipulation to conform to their ideas and ways of life), and with no help of each other (no family because we were ripped apart by barbarians and language barriers), we began to become a very broken and angry culture who dealt with our problems through aggression and street remedies. And the reason why it continues is because we were never given the same opportunity as you privileged white guys, as we were put in these low life quality neighborhoods with horrible school systems all because whites felt threatened by our skin difference. Of course some of us went with our strengths such as physical aptitudes and artistic spirituality (which is why African-Americans are at the forefront of everything Sports and Performing Arts related). Oprah is the Richest Woman and most Powerful woman in America, Obama is the president. Let’s not talk about sports because we 'murder' in this field. And as for performers-Michael Jackson, Leontyne Price, Jessye Norman, Ella Fitzgerald, Louis Armstrong, Beyonce, Bobby McFerrin, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey, the Harlem Renaissance, etc! Also, did you know that all math (Algebra, Geometry, Calculus, etc) and many other scientific inventions and theories derive from the Egyptians who were black/Africans? Also, what is weird is that Chinese people are the leads in academic ability. So where does that leave your race? But as far as violence, isn’t your race well known for that. I mean look how inhumane whites were when they lynched black men, women, and CHILDREN!!! They hung them, drug them in the streets, burned them alive, etc. Was Hitler not white? I do recall him killing millions of people. What about Napoleon Bonaparte, Rasputin? You said we treat our women wrong by calling them hoes and bitches, what about King Henry VIII (who killed majority of his wives because they couldn’t produce boys, which science now says that it is the male genes that determine the sex of a child). Also, do you remember how the beautiful ‘White America’ dropped an atomic bomb on millions of innocent Japanese people (Hiroshima)? You are also blithely unaware of the fact that more whites use drugs than that of the black race. It is a fact; you should Google it, lol. So really, isn’t it me who should be asking you to prove that your race deserves the label, “human”, when in fact, history shows contradiction and opposition (does it not?) for the bizarre statements you've all made! You are all complete moronic hypocrites!

You are dismissed.

Anonymous said...

In the name of white racial identity, whites have engaged in genocidal warfare against Native Americans. As the victor in this war, whites took land and natural resources not rightfully their own and corralled the surviving Native Nations onto reservations and forced them into inequitable treaty agreements, before attempting to make them disappear entirely through programs of forced assimilation. And ever since, it’s been part of white identity to celebrate white settler history and tout U.S. exceptionalism in spite of the fact that this nation is founded upon genocide.

Whites enslaved Africans – they invented race as we know it for this purpose. Even after a war was waged to end slavery, whites invented convicted leasing. Through this system, they unjustly imprisoned Blacks for the purpose of re-enslaving them. By doing so they not only created a pool of free labor, they terrorized the mass of the Black community of the South into remaining in poor jobs, often for their former masters and their descendents, for fear that they would be imprisoned since unemployment was a crime for Blacks in some jurisdictions. And where Blacks are concerned, much more followed, including Jim Crow and our current war on drugs (notice how I bring that up constantly? I think you should, too).

Whites vilified, persecuted, and alternately exploited and then excluded Asians and waged a war against Mexico and forced them into an inequitable sale of territory that includes all or part of seven U.S. states. And there was Jim Crow, lynchings, mass race riots targeting Black and Asian laborers, and more, and largely with impunity. I would go on, but I think you get the point.

The whole of the U.S. experiment in democracy is marred by incidents of racist brutality, violence, and warfare, and the legal diminution, dehumanization, and exclusion of people of color. In fact, it is what most characterizes race relations in America.

If an attempt were made to racially profile whites, the picture we would come away with would be anything but pretty. So I’ve been wondering lately, why is it that in spite of the fact that very nearly every modern mass shooting is committed by white males there is still no white racial profile of the mass shooter. One would think that a population, defined by race by their own choosing, that has for so long condoned mass murder, especially in the name of their race, would be, therefore, suspect every time an act of terrorism and mass murder took place in America. But they aren’t.

Diamed said...

All white 'sins' are washed clean by the most basic moral principle of this world: The superior should supplant the inferior. We can kill Amerindians and take their land for the same reason we can kill and eat animals -- we're better than them so we deserve it and they don't.

It's indisputable that colonial whites were superior to savage Amerindians or blacks, who were still living in the stone age at the time. If you look at art, scientific discoveries, standard of living, economic output, length of life, or any other standard you like, it's a good thing that the western United States belongs to white Americans instead of hispanic Mexicans or American Indians, who underperform us on every metric.

Anonymous said...

African Blacks have two hands, two legs, a head and have the appearance closest resembling humans. Perhaps they are subhumans, but they definitely are some kind of humans, even if subspecies of humans or a link or a bridge between apes and humans. They can be trained to read and they can speak and drive cars, do at least 90% as humans do. What other mammal can do as Blacks do even if they don't do it perfectly or as good as the Whites do? Both wolves and dogs howl and scratch the same way and they can act cute.
In a physical way Blacks are super human and in a mental way they are subhuman. Yet George W. Bush is an example of the lowest kind of subhuman that's ever existed on Planet Error or Earth.

Anonymous said...

Blacks are man's best friends.

Anonymous said...

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1086/381006?uid=3738312&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101009496083
Rogers et al. (2004) performed an examination of the variation in MC1R nucleotide sequences for people of different ancestry and compared the sequences of chimpanzees and humans from various regions of the Earth. Rogers concluded that roughly five million years ago, at the time of the evolutionary separation of chimpanzees and humans, the common ancestors of all humans had light skin that was covered by dark hair. Additionally, our closest extant relative, the chimpanzee, has light skin covered by thick body hair.
Your 10 or so paragraphs have been invalidated with that ONE ^^
You cannot use skin color to hypothize any of what you just did. If that was so, how does it feel to know you are more closely related to the chimp than blacks because chimps are light skinned covered with dark hair?
How can someone or a group be so wicked and unkind to another group just because of their skin color? Think about the KKK and other groups that have been so wicked without reason, or maybe it is simply because you look different than they do? Do you remember the Tulsa bombing in Oklahoma? For all this hate what is the reason?
You mentioned that blacks lack intelligence and has never made any practical invention or contribution. Again, let me enlighten your darkness (it is better to be dark in skin and bright in mind, than the other way around). Here are a few black contributors and inventors:
Otis Boykin – inventor of 28 electronic devices including a type of pace maker, a control unit for heart stimulators, a burglar-proof cash register and a chemical air filter
Dr. Charles Richard Drew was the first to establish a blood bank – think of the lives this has saved.
Lewis Latimer (1848–1928) invented an important part of the light bulb — the carbon filament.
Garrett Morgan invented the first traffic lights – again, what chaos we would be in?
Dr. Daniel Hale Williams – FIRST cardiologist and FIRST to perform the OPEN HEART SURGERY
I could go on and on, but I think I’ve proven that point.

I know you will continue to hate the African race and nothing I post will ever change that. However, I want you to compare the history of both the Europeans and Africans and see which one was given a raw deal in history. Which one was most wicked, most violent (World wars, Vietnamese war, Iraqi and other modern wars)? Which one is so greedy that they enslave others to work for them? And which one has people that hate races that are of no threat to them?

Anonymous said...

I would like to add an addendum to the article. And, that is that all species of Homo sapien "or not" are still ... just animals. Yes, you're an animal. I'm an animal. The racists are animals. The nonracists are animals. We're all animals. If we're going to discuss 'facts' then we should at least put all the 'facts' into the mix.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and one last thing. Cultural differences are not scientific evidences for blacks being a different species.

Sorry, your piece is interesting but it lacks truth. The evidence you've given doesn't meet the burden of proof that blacks are a different species than the other species of Homon sapien.

Diamed said...

Scientists have seen fit to classify 200,000 different species of moths. To get 200,000 different moth species, you can bet that every single moth with a different spot or stripe is classified as a whole new species. And yet, when we have some people living in mud huts while others live in skyscrapers, that's still not enough evidence to classify races into separate species. Please explain how this makes sense.

Anonymous said...

You know about history, yet you ignore how savegly cruel the white race has behaved towards their own race as well as others. A few examples: The inquisition, and the crusades. Hitler, and even the Salem witch trials are a few examples of how uncivilized human beings have been. Also, you failed to mention what is going on in North Korea, and the inhumane violence going on in China today. The Chinese have yet to learn how to behave civil towards their own people.

So, it is not black and white; all human races, regardless of tech advancement are still wild creatures, capable of unbelievable acts of barbaric behavior. Recent revolutions are another example.

In order to build, we need two very important things: A leader with controlling power, and obedient followers. The Black race never had that. They never had anyone convincing enough, or smart enough to lead, or they would have had what we call culture, and civilization.

As for IQ: You cannot expect blacks to know what you know, so how can you compare them with yourselves?

I have learned in school that we are all biologically the same.

I am so grateful that there were white humans with love and compassion for other living things in existence, allowing blackss to integrate with us. Focus on the ones who have made wonderful contributions, and there are many.

Anonymous said...

The Neandethal DNA factor explains EVERYTHING.
Science MUST be true to itself and reclasify the Sub Saharan African!!!

Anonymous said...

http://news.yahoo.com/nj-teens-accused-killing-girl-showed-2-sides-215035844.html

^^CLAYTON, N.J. (AP) — Something struck Toni Fiorella whenever she would see a mother from her hometown drop two teenage sons off at the laundromat to do the family's wash. She didn't know them by name, but they were always respectful. Their mother must be on to something, Fiorella thought.
"It's good," she said. "She's making them responsible."
Now, authorities say, those same boys are accused of killing a 12-year-old neighborhood girl and stuffing her body into a recycling bin near their home. Authorities say she was lured with the promise of new parts for the beloved bicycle she was riding before she disappeared."

so much for that whole "we've evolved past this savage nature that exists in the black African"....if neanderthals aren't classified as humans then what makes whites (descended from a mixture of African and neanderthal) more human than their African ancestors...a rather fallacious argument indeed....

Diamed said...

You do realize the two teenage boys who murdered Autumn Pasquale, a 12 year old white girl, were black, right?

Anonymous said...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/tyler-hadley-florida-teen_n_902212.html

ah your right it seems the two boys in the previous post were indeed black....but there are a magnitude of different cases of serial killings to chose from (all committed by the white civilized human race) for example the link above and secondly I'm interested to hear your response to this "....if neanderthals aren't classified as humans then what makes whites (descended from a mixture of African and neanderthal) more human than their African ancestors"...and evolution doesn't explain this since it takes millions of years for evolution (not to be confused phenotypic mutations or adaptations) to occur within a population and unfortunately the human race is just not that old...

Diamed said...

Read "The 10,000 Year Explosion" by Gregory Cochran. He explains that in fact, human evolution has been massive in a relatively short time frame and is accelerating even as we speak. A lot has changed since the races divided. Whites evolved from a mix of African and Neanderthal genes, and the completely novel environment they were in (the cold north and vastly populated, extremely sophisticated urban environments made possible by the agricultural revolution, neither of which occurred in Africa, who never formed metropolises like Paris or Rome) accelerated that evolution via natural selection. Both the Neanderthal admixture and the different environments helps explain how we ended up so radically different from the Africans 'left behind.'

I'm sure you can find plenty of bad white people if you search long enough, but the nature of their crimes tends to be less heinous and less prevalent. IE, you will never find a single case of 20 whites gang raping an 11 year old girl, but 20 blacks did this to a hispanic 11 year old just this year in Texas. And when you do find a white who kills a 12 year old girl, he tends to be insane or extremely abnormal, but this sort of killing goes on among even typical, normal black boys that appear to be no different before or after from the rest of their peer groups.

For one group, only a horrible mistake can give birth to such a monster. But for the other, it's just par for the course, a normal day at the golf range. One third of black males serve time in jail for a felony offense. Killing a 12 year old is the norm for them, but for us, killers are freaks of nature. You could call them evolutionary throwbacks, sort of like how some people are born with vestigial tails or gills.

Anonymous said...

Blacks are technically human but not the same species as whites. The way scientists distiguish different races is called taxonomy, the problem is they use one rule for animals and a different rule for humans in an effort to stop racism... For example take two types of gorrila, Gorrila Beringei and Gorrila Gorrila, Gorrila is the Genus and Beringei or Gorrila is the species. They are both but Gorrilas but different species of Gorilla. THEY ARE DIFFERENT SPECIES. Now, the gentic difference between GB and GG is less than the genetic difference between white humans and black humans. So, how is it possible that whites and blacks are the same species even though they are more different from each other than the two species of Gorrila are? Its not possible. Another example is the Common Chimp and the Bonobo Chimp, it is exactly the same situation here. Like I said, one rule animals, but for some reason that rule doesnt apply to humans. It is an efort to stop racism and slavery. Also the theory of all humans origionating from Africa is false. First, use common sense. How is an early primitive human going make his way from Africa to Europe? He cant. He would have such little knowledge of the world that when he came to the seaside he would think it was the end of world and turn around walk the other way. Even if he did think there was something out there he would have no idea how to travel acroos the sea as it is a lot more than just building a boat and rowing. Now, some archeology. When early human bones are found in Africa they are mainly from Homo Erectus and some from Homo Habilis, no Homo Neanderthalis bones are found in Africa. However, Homo Neanderthalis bones are found all over Europe and guess what... None from Homo Erectus. So what we can gather from this is that Europians evolved from Homo Neaderthalis and Africans evolved form Homo Erectus. Whites did not come from Blacks and only Africans origionated from Africa. So , black peopler are acutally human but they are not the same species as whites, and neither are mongolians. One of us is the Homo Sapien (it makes no difference which one as its just a label and no indication of superiority), and the other two are not.

Anonymous said...

reading this thread it really saddens me to see such blind hatred of the black race and the blatant correlation of skin pigmentation to inferiority (ie: black skin is disgusting, nonhuman, vile, and is the cause of all evil) is it really dishonorable to aspire that sometime,
somewhere, men will judge men by their souls and not by their skins. Is such a hope justified?
Do the Sorrow Songs sing true?
The silently growing assumption of this age is that the probation of races is past, and that
the backward races of to-day are of proven inefficiency and not worth the saving. Such an
assumption is the arrogance of peoples irreverent toward Time and ignorant of the deeds of men.
A thousand years ago such an assumption, easily possible, would have made it difficult for the
Teuton to prove his right to life. Two thousand years ago such dogmatism, readily welcome,
would have scouted the idea of blond races ever leading civilization. So wofully unorganized is
sociological knowledge that the meaning of progress, the meaning of "swift" and "slow" in
human doing, and the limits of human perfectability, are veiled, unanswered sphinxes on the
shores of science. Why should Aeschylus have sung two thousand years before Shakespeare was
born? Why has civilization flourished in Europe, and flickered, flamed, and died in Africa? So
long as the world stands meekly dumb before such questions, shall this nation proclaim its
ignorance and unhallowed prejudices by denying freedom of opportunity to those who brought
the Sorrow Songs to the Seats of the Mighty. yes us blacks have contributed greatly socially, economically, and scientifically to this country, you and I are entitled to our own beliefs but not our own facts and history has shown that the black race is not as irrelevant as you claim us to be.

Anonymous said...

Yes, but I think you are looking at this the wrong way. What if blacks, whites and Asians are all different subspecies? With Whites on the top, Asians in the Middle, and Blacks on the bottom in terms of intelligence. That would make the most sense. As for the whole mudhuts thing, there are South American tribes that are even more primitive than African ones.

Anonymous said...

All you ignorant, brainwashed by the media jerks that come on here bashing this post just can't face the truth about these savage beasts!! Everything that was said in this post is 100% TRUE and the fact that you pieces of garbage can't accept the truth doesn't change it.

Niggers are subhuman, evil, demonic, nasty, filthy, pieces of genetic garbage!!! Enough said!

Ssvilaxnx3 said...

I do not hate niggers but I have more respect for a dog than a nigger. I have black friends but I do not have nigger friends. Niggers are less than people underdevoloped corrupt animals where as a black person is a person. The bush men and aboriginals can love in peace and I don't think we should fuck with them but I would help south american kids put asian kids or whites or dogs before I would give charity to them our any black culture. There are very few african men that do well in life even with the same opportunities as non blacksand then they will claim that they didn't have the same opportunity and that white people are racist.maybe I am but out is only because of mostly negative interactions with niggers

Diamed said...

http://www.livescience.com/25361-monkeys-show-why-it-s-hard-to-prove-ancient-human-interbreeding.html

Scientists yet again let the secret out of the bag that species can interbreed and have fertile offspring with each other, while still being categorized as separate species:

"Researchers examined blood samples, hair samples and measurements collected from mantled howler monkeys and black howler monkeys that were live-captured and released in Mexico and Guatemala between 1998 and 2008. The two monkey species splintered off from a common ancestor about 3 million years ago and today they live in mostly separate habitats, except for a "hybrid zone" in the state of Tabasco in southeastern Mexico, where they coexist and interbreed.

Through an analysis of genetic markers, from both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, the researchers identified 128 hybrid individuals that were likely the product of several generations of interbreeding. But these hybrids shared most of their genome with either one of the two species and were physically indistinguishable from the pure individuals of that species, the team found."

If these monkeys can interbreed for several generations, why are they classified as separate species? Apparently because they look different. You see, one has black fur, so it's a different species, hence, black howler monkey.

It's okay to call a monkey a different species if it has black fur, but it's not okay to call a black a different species if it has black skin. QED.

Anonymous said...

"If these monkeys can interbreed for several generations, why are they classified as separate species? Apparently because they look different. You see, one has black fur, so it's a different species, hence, black howler monkey.
It's okay to call a monkey a different species if it has black fur, but it's not okay to call a black a different species if it has black skin. QED."

ok so the premise is a difference in looks equates to us being different "species". The issue here is why are the "blacks" (again whatever that means the only target of this blog. Asians look different from whites (the mongols), so according to your premise they too are a different subspecies of the human race? in other words the human race is divided into three Phylum: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid? you can't apply logic to something primal like racism, that is simply counter-intuitive. Racism is an attitude molded by "FEAR" nothing more nothing less, and so you don't really need a reason to hate black people (because according to you they will never be good enough). and so I don't really see the point of this blog...

Diamed said...

What's important to note here isn't whether groups should be separated on the basis of looks or not. It's the hypocrisy of scientists classifying monkeys one way and humans another.

Anonymous said...

Negros are a type of impulsive & violent protohuman, they wear clothing & can speak a rudimentary form of English.
The most annoying aspect of my life in the US with them is that they have been classified as humans & given full human rights (more if you ask some people).
Because of this, they are allowed to freely roam amongst humans, to use public transport & sit next to human children in schools with disastrous consequences.
I curse our founders daily for importing these beasts.

Anonymous said...

By "Jumpin' Jiminy Jigaboo"
Black NIGGERS aren't human.....Period!!! Just look at their appearance and the primitive and violent way that they act. That is enough proof that NIGGERS are NOT human!!!!

Anonymous said...

...and if whites cannot contract A.I.D.S. directly from the african green monkey, but instead have to get it from blacks, then is this not an argument that blacks are the missing link?

RickS said...

Very Well put.... with regards to the LAST Comment **They are consumed with hatered and resentment. They know that they are inferior and act ion eternal frustration.**

True it is mostly Blacks that are like this. However I have seen many Hispanics (mostly dark brown and Indio Hispanics) act like this.... Much of california has radicalized Hispanics/Mexicans that refuse to Americanize (though their US Born kids do)! But yes Blacks are a different breed all together!

RickS said...

Well pointed - But certain other US groups are close to blacks. Look at Hispanics much of their crime and Education levels are nearly as bad as blacks... And what pisses me off is the Feds dump them with Whites.

I know its mostly Mullatoe / Indian / Mestizo Hispanics that fall into this catergory... In some ways this sub-group is more dangerous to the US than Blacks... At least a good percentage of Hispanics Integrate/Assimilate rather well and though they have a chip on their shoulder and to an Extent (the foreign hispanics) dislike this country and claim it as their own, unlike Blakcs at least many of them particularly their US Born kids integrate/assimilate.... Some unfortunatley don't and pick up a Ghetto/Black (Spiggerized) inner City Culture.... Truly sad.... Soon we'll be dealing with 2 sets of Moochers... Blcks and a certain Hispanic Sub-Type! Thanks

Anonymous said...

"Africans never built a wheel, but that’s not saying much. They did built the Walls of Benin and Great Zimbabwe, both of which take more skill to build than a wheel. So it's not as though all Africans lived in huts. And it’s really poverty that has Africa in the state it’s in. People act as though Africans always were in a state of chaos and crime. Yet both European and Arab explorers alike often commented on the lack of theft and the security in pre-colonial Africa. It’s no coincidence that Africa was more stable before European colonization. Also aboriginal Australians have Neanderthal DNA."

I have seen the Great Zimbabwe and it looks pathetic, and as pathetic as these African buildings are they were also built in places where Arabs either ruled or brought Islam to them. Where there were no civilized contacts you wouldn't find more than mudhuts. You left out how despite the domestic stability of whatever tribes were at the time, civilized commentators also described the depravity and savagery of these blacks. Abos have Denisovan DNA, not Nean, found in some other Negritos in South Pacific and Indian Ocean

Conway said...

A brilliant article; veritas odium parit...

Anonymous said...

there is nothing good to be said about niggers even as one is us press. They are still not human and never will be. I agree they are like pet such as digs we allow to exist. Its time to get rid of the dogs, they are not producing any more.

Anonymous said...

I Agree that where ever they go, the crime and corruption of society follows. Undeniable.

You can see it with your own eyes, just go to any majorly black area and go and have a chat with the locals about their thoughts on this matter.

You won't get a reasoned and logical response, you will get either beaten up for being ''racist'' or just a load of half english mumbo jumbo.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 622   Newer› Newest»