quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bentley
I haven't checked any specific article other than what has been presented here. Personally I think that racism being "genetic" isn't any more shocking than "rape" being genetic. We all agree these things can be overturned by education so it hardly makes up for anything other than a token win.

Unlike some conservatives I'm not obsessed with how humans are "by nature", some people will gladly refuse to accept natural homosexuality like hypocrites and argue that natural selfishness should keep us from giving universal income to people. This is not about nitpicking or choosing arguments to fit a narrative for me. If racism is somehow natural then it's a serious consideration to take in certain poor communities.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bentley
I rather avoid the "having my cake and then eating it" arguments you are throwing here.

You cannot say racism isn't genetic because there wasn't multiculturalism in the past and then say multiculturalism would make genetic racism impossible to trigger. If we are intellectually honest there is no reason to debunk genetic racism with that kind of "by default" argument.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
As someone with degrees in molecular biology and genetics I disagree about racism being biological.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
or option 3 as everyone from DMB to Snowdragon to Rob and PVS, in fact everyone but the close hangouts gang. Race is a social construct and you don't like the fact my evidence is better. Look at your brains trust seriously. Lolz.

But of course, every new member is Whirly. Btw, to all new members, randoms and old poster who bothered to read everything, cheers!



Enjoy.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
How is that strawman working out for you?

You do understand you're arguing "the genes of race" vs. my point which is "the genes of racism" right?


Let me know how your alleles discussion works with infants when you yell at them to stop being racist.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
As someone with degrees in molecular biology and genetics I disagree about racism being biological.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
Don't forget about this giant mistake you posted:

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
you see, it's no mistake DDM as pretty much every neutral has explained you have nothing. You're using discredited behavioural studies. You can try and make it personal. It isn't from me; you're just wrong. As the last study i posted which gives very hard Science alludes. It's like you don't understand the difference between hard science and your strawman.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Premolar
Exactly! I understand what's happening now.

You're Whirly and really respected, and they want to be.

It's why they won't debate with you. This thread in the comics section made it clear.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/...=2#post16869364

Doodooman is still owning himself it seems.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Well actually, it is a little bit...

The reaction to African-American faces was found to be weaker in people with racially diverse peers.

There's never been good reason to believe that human beings are naturally racist. After all, in the environment of human evolution--which didn't feature, for example, jet travel to other continents--there would have been virtually no encounters between groups that had different skin colors or other conspicuous physical differences. So it's not as if the human lineage could have plausibly developed, by evolutionary adaptation, an instinctive reaction to members of different races.

Nonetheless, people who want to argue that racism_is_natural have tried to buttress their position with evidence that racism is in some sense biological. For example: studies have found that when whites see black faces there is increased activity in the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotion and, specifically, with the detection of threats.

Well, whatever power that kind of argument ever had--which wasn't much, since the fact that a psychological reaction has a biological correlate doesn't tell you whether the reaction is innate--it has even less power now. In a_paper_that will be published in the_Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Eva Telzer of UCLA and three other researchers report that they've performed these amygdala studies--which had previously been done on adults--on children. And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.


What's more: once it kicks in, it doesn't kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse your peer group, the less reliable the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ''these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.''


This, with the evidence from Genetic studies, is interesting.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
This just wasn't your topic. You'll have to do better to troll next time. Everyone can tell you're at the very end of your ropes when you start lying about "discredited" stuff. It's a bit sad.

Good luck in the next troll game you play. If you need me to double check your facts for you in the future, send me a PM and I'll help.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Premolar
Exactly! I understand what's happening now.

You're Whirly and really respected, and they want to be.

It's why they won't debate with you. This thread in the comics section made it clear.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/...=2#post16869364

Doodooman is still owning himself it seems.