It seems I have been censored, however. My new posts no longer show up when I'm logged out. No reason given. I also can't create another account.
My guess is it's because I said IQ was hereditary? Hard to tell which of my posts violated which unwritten rule.
I'm very disappointed at the blatant exercise of power to silence me here. I said nothing against any individual, thought through my points, and have always been civil. And the under-handed shadowban methodology - ugh.
I've actually found it works a lot better if both people just allow the contentious statements. Just let each person say, "Oh that's ridiculous because..." and the other replies with "You're totally missing this point..." Even if people raise their voice or scoff, it's fine. The key is to just keep going.
If you go on long enough, the points do start sinking in.
Too many people assume that acrimony means that the discussion must end immediately. But that's not true at all. It's exceptionally hard, sometimes, to meet clashing beliefs with entirely soft voices and polite manners. You don't have to suppress everything you want to say. You can let it out. So can the other person. It's good. (Obviously it shouldn't raise to a degree where people are screaming continuously or acting violent).
Maturity doesn't just mean always speaking softly. It can also mean being able to make and reject points forcefully, and not wilt like a delicate flower if the other person does the same.
The real key is that people need to not be so delicate. Accept the natural difficulties of clashing belief systems. Just stick in there, let the acrimony happen, don't give up. Eventually - 10 or 20 or 30 minutes later - you'll get to something meaningful simply because there's no way to talk that long without both people having a lot of time to make real points.
Wikipedia is wrong (due to massive leftist egalatarian bias in Wikipedia and their media sources).
The best research using twin and adoption studies puts IQ heredity at ~80%, with the other 20% from unknown factors. Incidentally, there is zero impact from childhood environment.
Wikipedia is wrong (due to massive leftist egalatarian bias in Wikipedia and their media sources).
The best research using twin and adoption studies puts IQ heredity at ~80%, with the other 20% from unknown factors. Incidentally, there is zero impact from childhood environment.
It's pretty trivial to apply these signals to nearly any collectivist social movement.
1. Action for action's sake - Black Lives Matter protests to block highways.
2. Exploit the fear of difference - Those horrible racist uneducated people are nothing like us, we can't let them take the country! This is basic tribalism and it applies to every major social movement.
3. Rewritten: "To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Anti-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be good, moral egalitarians. This is the origin of anti-fascism."
Here I've applied them to Western progressivism, but if you deny the basic assumptions of any collectivist social movement you could apply them. Scientology, communism, socialism, fascism. Switch a few unimportant words and there you are with the same meaningless parallels.
The human mind is a great pattern matching machine but has a problem with false positives.
EDIT: It's important to remember when comparing Trump to old fascists that the people who defeated those fascists enacted Trump's policies. For example, in 1945, immigration policy in all western countries was effectively, "whites only".
So if you're gonna notice parallels between Trump and Hitler, you have to notice even closer parallels between Trump and the people who defeated Hitler. You should also notice the differences: Trump is an isolationist who wants to start wars less than Hillary - a lot like pre-WW2 America.
You seem to have it backwards, predictions that have been made have consistently overestimated climate change. Typically the real temperature change is at or below the bottom of their ranges.
This is the "global warming pause" that they didn't predict and rushed to explain as unimportant.
Don't you remember back 10-12 years ago when the ice caps were supposed to be almost gone by now? Haven't you noticed that no cities have actually been affected by any sea level change - that nothing has actually happened?
1. White people commit racism and violence against blacks
causes
2. White people flee to the suburbs
causes
3. Urban centers to deteriorate.
Let's examine:
1->2 So white people were fleeing... their own violence against blacks?
2->3 So when those violent people left, this cause the areas to get... worse?
Apparently you believe white people being present is a problem, and white people leaving is a problem. Their presence hurts blacks, and when they leave it hurts blacks too. So literally everything is the fault of white people, whether they're coming or going, here or there.
Even more surreal - these blacks voluntarily moved towards the whites. Then the whites moved to escape the blacks. And the bad guys here are... the whites! The ones who blacks want to live around, and who are trying to flee them.
It really is remarkable the rationalizations a mind is capable of.
"The fact that this can happen to me anywhere, at any time, for any reason makes me not even want to go outside at times, and makes me fear for the lives of my family since it can happen to any of them, too."
The real crime here is lying - lying by media and activists who have created this very real and very destructive fear, despite there being no actual problem to be afraid of.
And it's not just this man's psychological price. The Ferguson Effect - increase in black-on-black crime as police withdraw due to political pressure and violent resistance - has caused hundreds of excess deaths of blacks. Far more than the cops ever did. http://observer.com/2016/07/no-decent-person-ever-said-black...
If this man is a victim, he's a victim of the victimology industry that is nourished by the pain of his people - and seeks to maximize that pain.
Poor eyesight has no adaptive benefit. Yet many, many people need glasses. I guess it's just 'difficult' for our genes to grow a sharp eye focusing system, so they often get it wrong.
The same may be true of homosexuality. So even if there's nothing adaptive about being gay, it keeps happening because sexual tuning in the brain is a hard target to hit.
Homophobia may be an adaptation to this. It makes parents force their children to act straight even if they're gay.
China has a long history of advanced (for the time) civilization and a high-IQ population (~105). They were backward for just a few centuries because of a series of bad ideologies - isolationism, followed by communism. For most of history China was the highest-tech civilization on Earth. All they had to do to achieve demographic transition was get back to their historical norm.
Africa has no history of advanced civilization and a low-IQ population (~75). There's reason to think they'll sustain higher birthrates than everyone else, indefinitely. To achieve demographic transition they'll have to do something they've never done before.
The hypothesis I put forth (implicitly) is that homosexual genes are still around because of the massive social pressure to have children and to never admit being gay.
Now that this pressure is gone, we could see a huge drop in these traits over the next few centuries.
Eventually, evolution will re-assert itself. The sub-populations who, for whatever reason, continue to grow in population will come to dominate the numbers, after the non-breeding groups die off.
E.g. in America, fertility is passing below replacement rates - on average. But the Amish population still doubles every 20 years. In 200 years, there will be hundreds of millions of Amish.
We could be looking at a world of Amish, Quiverfulls, poor tribalistic Africans, religious Muslims, and orthodox Jews. There will be very few left-liberals, the childfree movement will be gone (like the Shakers already are). Gays and other queer people may breed out of the gene pool if their modern freedom reduces the fertility of their genes.
Modernity may very well be self-defeating, because the future belongs to those who show up.
It seems I have been censored, however. My new posts no longer show up when I'm logged out. No reason given. I also can't create another account.
My guess is it's because I said IQ was hereditary? Hard to tell which of my posts violated which unwritten rule.
I'm very disappointed at the blatant exercise of power to silence me here. I said nothing against any individual, thought through my points, and have always been civil. And the under-handed shadowban methodology - ugh.
I was hoping for better from HN.