Christianity

[Alexis Jacobi]

You're insane. Welcome to the looney bin, I guess.

What have you done for the Blacks recently, Gary?

[Gary Childress]

Oh? So now you insist that Murray's claim is a "fact"? So you believe that blacks are lower in IQ? Very interesting conclusion on your part. If so, that would certainly explain the reasons for your thinking on DEI: you think they need it because they are less bright, according to you and Murray.

But I think you should question Murray's cited statistic. I think you should check his evidence for it before you agree with him. Because if it turns out to be right, then it's the death of the prospect of DEI doing any good. It would just suggest you're forcing lower-IQ people into situations that demand a higher IQ.

And if you imagine the cause is social, then again, you're going to have to explain why a black kid from Chicago's affluent suburbs deserves a lower bar than the son of a Korean migrant or the daughter of an Indian shopkeeper... and why both of the latter deserve to be set an even higher bar than is set for whites. But I notice you're not even trying to answer that one.

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Checkmate, Gary. He’s got you by the balls!

If you agree with the premise that the African nations in the New World inevitably perform in a third class behind Asians and Whites, and never seem to be able to rise out of the conditions that have molded them historically, then you hypocritical rat, you overstuffed blubbering White DEI advocate, you must admit that you are a dreaded racist mutherfuquer.

You see, Gary? You see how the ultimate moral manipulation works? When you cannot notice and describe the world as it really is, you have to lie to yourself, and once invested in the lie you remain trapped in the lie, and susceptible to arch-hypocrisy at the hand of an arch moral manipulator.

Oh this is delicious! It is like gooey moral taffy heated up in a DEI microwave.

Are you going to dye your hair bright pink too?

Immanuel, the very ghost of Jesus flutters around your overblown chessboard righteousness! God bless all the Earth’s wee children, all gloriously equal in His sight, and you : Truth Defender hater of Democrats the KKK and all ad hominems that ever infected the muck in the lower spheres, you deserve not one but TWO Holy pretzels!

Well done truly faithful servant & God’s own righteous child! Master pontificator and supreme forward-thinking apologist!

Gary, you have been very very naughty but though busted you CAN redeem yourself. ThinkOfOne has arrived and is primed to lay out the medicinal sacrificial truths encoded scripturally. Boom! The hammer drops. Even Sr Semillas will lend a helping holy hand as you squirm out from under your False Doctrines. I suspect even Promethean will intone in Ebonics some Marxism hymn to push you to a better POV …

Belinda is knitting you Muslim-luvin’ socks!

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Let’s get down to genuine moral business!

[Gary Childress]

You're insane. Welcome to the looney bin, I guess.

What have you done for the Blacks recently, Gary?

I don't know. Should I be petitioning to end DEI and "affirmative action"? Will that be "doing something" for them?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Do you have Black neighbors? Might I suggest you gift them a case of Miracle WhipⓇ mayonnaise? It would be a small gesture but one sure to be appreciated. You of all people recognize a debt owed, don’t you?

Do the right thing, Gary. Put up or shut up!

[Gary Childress]

Do you have Black neighbors? Might I suggest you gift them a case of Miracle WhipⓇ mayonnaise? It would be a small gesture but one sure to be appreciated. You of all people recognize a debt owed, don’t you?

Do the right thing, Gary. Put up or shut up!

[Immanuel Can]

Therein lies the problem, IC. If a fact is inconvenient to you, then you just ignore it or disbelieve it.

Oh? So now you insist that Murray's claim is a "fact"? So you believe that blacks are lower in IQ? Very interesting conclusion on your part. If so, that would certainly explain the reasons for your thinking on DEI: you think they need it because they are less bright, according to you and Murray.

But I think you should question Murray's cited statistic. I think you should check his evidence for it before you agree with him. Because if it turns out to be right, then it's the death of the prospect of DEI doing any good. It would just suggest you're forcing lower-IQ people into situations that demand a higher IQ.

And if you imagine the cause is social, then again, you're going to have to explain why a black kid from Chicago's affluent suburbs deserves a lower bar than the son of a Korean migrant or the daughter of an Indian shopkeeper... and why both of the latter deserve to be set an even higher bar than is set for whites. But I notice you're not even trying to answer that one.

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

You're insane. Welcome to the looney bin, I guess.

I see. Straight to the ad hominem. Well, Gary, I don't do that to you, but when a person is totally out of arguments, I guess that's what they often do. As the old saying goes, "When wisdom fails us, we must resort to cream pies."

[Gary Childress]

Oh? So now you insist that Murray's claim is a "fact"? So you believe that blacks are lower in IQ? Very interesting conclusion on your part. If so, that would certainly explain the reasons for your thinking on DEI: you think they need it because they are less bright, according to you and Murray.

But I think you should question Murray's cited statistic. I think you should check his evidence for it before you agree with him. Because if it turns out to be right, then it's the death of the prospect of DEI doing any good. It would just suggest you're forcing lower-IQ people into situations that demand a higher IQ.

And if you imagine the cause is social, then again, you're going to have to explain why a black kid from Chicago's affluent suburbs deserves a lower bar than the son of a Korean migrant or the daughter of an Indian shopkeeper... and why both of the latter deserve to be set an even higher bar than is set for whites. But I notice you're not even trying to answer that one.

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

You're insane. Welcome to the looney bin, I guess.

I see. Straight to the ad hominem. Well, Gary, I don't do that to you, but when a person is totally out of arguments, I guess that's what they often do. As the old saying goes, "When wisdom fails us, we must resort to cream pies."

What's the point of me debating you. You didn't answer my question after I answered yours. You don't think statistics matter or are true. It's laudable that you want the statistics to be wrong, we all do, but that doesn't appear to be the case from what I can tell, unless you have a source that corroborates the belief that the statistics are wrong.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Gary, there obviously is no point in debating Immanuel, but dammit man that is the point!

[Gary Childress]

Gary, there obviously is no point in debating Immanuel, but dammit man that is the point!

Your commentary is unneeded and undesired in this discussion.

[Immanuel Can]

You're insane. Welcome to the looney bin, I guess.

I see. Straight to the ad hominem. Well, Gary, I don't do that to you, but when a person is totally out of arguments, I guess that's what they often do. As the old saying goes, "When wisdom fails us, we must resort to cream pies."

What's the point of me debating you. You didn't answer my question after I answered yours.

Yes, I did. I said I don't believe Murray.

You don't think statistics matter or are true.

No, I merely call Murray's into question. And I wonder why you don't, too. Why are you siding with somebody who has a racist argument, without even checking his procedure? There are such things as badly done studies, you know.

It's laudable that you want the statistics to be wrong, we all do, but that doesn't appear to be the case from what I can tell, unless you have a source that corroborates the belief that the statistics are wrong.

I don't go by appeal to authority, Gary...I require proof of the quality of the study in question. So should you. So citing a different study would not answer the question properly: only full examination of Murray's methods would do that.

But let's assume that Murray's right, as you seem to accept. If he has proved that black folks have a lower IQ, then DEI is useless. DEI cannot raise IQ. It does not even pretend to. So all DEI would amount to is a forced race-to-the-bottom, where those whom you and Murray believe have low IQ are given privileges they have no way of taking any advantage of. Putting low-IQ people into colleges will not make them bright: IQ is relatively stable, and varies relatively little over time, as you can find out from just googling that. It's a measure of potential, really, not a measure of education.

So now, if you're saying something about IQ, you're implying that minorities involved don't even have the potential to get smarter. And that makes DEI ineffective, except to pull down the standards. It will never improve society, if racial IQ is the issue. So now there's no reason for DEI.

I suggest, therefore, that you examine Murray's study, and see if his methodology actually shows what he claims it shows, or whether he's constructed his study badly. That's what I'd do, before I believed him.

[Gary Childress]

I see. Straight to the ad hominem. Well, Gary, I don't do that to you, but when a person is totally out of arguments, I guess that's what they often do. As the old saying goes, "When wisdom fails us, we must resort to cream pies."

What's the point of me debating you. You didn't answer my question after I answered yours.

Yes, I did. I said I don't believe Murray.

You don't think statistics matter or are true.

No, I merely call Murray's into question. And I wonder why you don't, too. Why are you siding with somebody who has a racist argument, without even checking his procedure? There are such things as badly done studies, you know.

It's laudable that you want the statistics to be wrong, we all do, but that doesn't appear to be the case from what I can tell, unless you have a source that corroborates the belief that the statistics are wrong.

I don't go by appeal to authority, Gary...I require proof of the quality of the study in question. So should you. So citing a different study would not answer the question properly: only full examination of Murray's methods would do that.

But let's assume that Murray's right, as you seem to accept. If he has proved that black folks have a lower IQ, then DEI is useless. DEI cannot raise IQ. It does not even pretend to. So all DEI would amount to is a forced race-to-the-bottom, where those whom you and Murray believe have low IQ are given privileges they have no way of taking any advantage of. Putting low-IQ people into colleges will not make them bright: IQ is relatively stable, and varies relatively little over time, as you can find out from just googling that. It's a measure of potential, really, not a measure of education.

So now, if you're saying something about IQ, you're implying that minorities involved don't even have the potential to get smarter. And that makes DEI ineffective, except to pull down the standards. It will never improve society, if racial IQ is the issue. So now there's no reason for DEI.

I suggest, therefore, that you examine Murray's study, and see if his methodology actually shows what he claims it shows, or whether he's constructed his study badly. That's what I'd do, before I believed him.

Can you demonstrate to me that DEI is failing? Do you have any statistics for it?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Do the methodology, Gary, but don’t neglect the gift of mayonnaise. They could well work in concert. Immanuel’s suggestion of Creme Pies is also good.

[Gary Childress]

Fair enough. The clouds have opened and God has spoken. I'm tired of arguing with disingenuous interlocutors. I give up.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Might not be God that spoke then. Generally, and these days certainly, we might hear God’s chortling laughter from On High, but if you heard articulated phrases it was likely an Impostor.

[Gary Childress]

Might not be God that spoke then. Generally, and these days certainly, we might hear God’s chortling laughter from On High, but if you heard articulated phrases it was likely an Impostor.

OK. Sounds good. Let's go with that.