Wrote Alex Jacob,Who do you refer to to support the idea of 'scientific reality of race' (distinct races, race-difference)?
Neil Risch, University of Stanford; Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota; Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota; John B. Carroll, Un. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii; David B. Cohen, University of Texas at Austin; Rene V. Dawis, University of Minnesota; Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve Un.; Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota; Hans Eysenck, University of London; Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology; Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University; Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve University; Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University; Linda S. Gottfredson, University of Delaware; Robert L. Greene, Case Western Reserve University; Richard J.Haier, University of Callifornia at Irvine; Garrett Hardin, University of California at Berkeley; Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa; Joseph M. Horn, University of Texas at Austin; Lloyd G. Humphreys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; John E. Hunter, Michigan State University; Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College; Douglas N. Jackson, Un. of Western Ontario; James J. Jenkins, University of South Florida; Arthur R. Jensen, University of California at Berkeley; Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama; Nadeen L. Kaufman, California School of Professional Psychology at San Diegol; Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University; Nadine Lambert, University of California at Berkeley; John C. Loehlin, University of Texas at Austin; David Lubinski, Iowa State University; David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota; Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine; Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota; R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia; Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburgh; Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London; Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A & M University; David C. Rowe, University of Arizona; J. Philippe Rushton, Un. of Western Ontario; Vincent Sarich, University of California at Berkeley; Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia; Frank L. Schmidt, University of Iowa; Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A & M University; James C. Sharf, George Washington University; Herman Spitz, former director E.R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentown, N.J.; Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University; Del Thiessen, University of Texas at Austin; Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve University; Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington Un.; Philip Anthony Vernon, Un. of Western Ontario; and Lee Willerman, University of Texas at Austin.
I have read some people, referring to genetic science, ...
Aye,?Consider, for instance, NEIL RISCH, leading American Population Geneticist and Professor at the University of California, whose recent Work irrefutably confirms the objective Reality of Race:?
"What makes the current study, published in the February issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics, more conclusive is its size. The study is by far the largest, consisting of 3,636 people who all identified themselves as either white, African-American, East Asian or Hispanic. Of these, only five individuals had DNA that matched an ethnic group different than the box they checked at the beginning of the study. That's an error rate of 0.14 percent.
"According to Neil Risch, PhD, a UCSF professor who led the study while he was professor of genetics at Stanford, the findings are particularly surprising given that people in both African-American and Hispanic ethnic groups often have a mixed background. "We might expect these individuals to cross several different genetic clusters," Risch said. This is especially true for Hispanics who are often a mix of Native American, white and African-American ancestry. But that's not what the study found. Instead, each self-identified racial/ethnic group clumped into the same genetic cluster." (
http://mednews.stanford.edu/releases/20 ... l-data.htm)
Who is forumlating public policy with the relevancy of 'race' as a consideration?
Who formulated the United States Immigration Act of 1924, or the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882? Who formulated Australia's White Australia policy, or Canada's Chinese Immigration Act of 1923? All I want is an Immigration Policy that reflects the ethnick Interests of the Majority, who, by the bye, are overwhelmingly in favour of greater Restrictions than at present exist. I desire Restrictions no severer than those that have been placed in, say,
Japan.
Are you opposed to all 'socialistic doctrine' . . .
It depends, Sir, on how you define Socialism. If by Socialism is meant publick Ownership of the Means of economick Production, then I am strongly in favour of moderate Socialism; howbeit by such Definition, "right-wing Reactionaries" such as PLATO, OTTO VON BISMARCK, and MUSSOLINI were as much Socialists as MARX, ENGELS, & LENIN. Now if by Socialism is meant, what I think conforms to the historickal Signification of the term, the Doctrine of social Equality; publick Ownership being only a
Means to such Equalitu; I repugn all Variety of Socialism, as contrary to human Nature.
In what ways do the nordic supremicism and antifeminism . . .
Antisemitism, not antifeminism.
. . . of the KKK, Duke and other national socialist dullards differ in their articulation of race difference from the sort that informs you?
Sir, mine is a purely empirical, non-valuative Conception of Race. I judge not by the colour of one's skin, but by the content of one's character; which not being directly observable, can only be infer'd by one's outward Behaviour; and discovering average Differences in Behaviour betwixt the various Races of Men, I act with greater precaution in respect of some Races than of others, and expect more creative Productivity of some than of others, in proportion as the said Races have been dispose'd to emit criminal or creative Behaviour, & in proportion as such behaviour is engendered by the Influences of Heredity. I have a higher regard for a Negro of Wit & Learning than a white Dullard; tho' I hold that a randomly selected Negro hath a different Probability of being man of Wit & Learning than a randomly selected Mongol, or White Man, or East Indian, owing to innate Differences in cognitive Capacity betwixt the said Peoples. And, what farther distinguishes me from the National Socialists, I include within my own race Category, the Jews, and other Indo-Mediterraneans ethnick Groups; excepting, however, certain Strains of the Mohammedan Arab Population, in whom Negroid Hybridisation hath been prevalent,?signify'd by a darker Tint of the Skin, & confirm'd by physical Anthropology as well as recent genetick Analyses.
If you are not anti-feminist are you pro-feminist?
No, Sir. I am against Feminism. I was referring to Antisemitism, not Antifeminism. I am opposed to any form of Equality betwixt the Sexes, except upon the Basis of Merit; altho' I hold that the average Woman is less intelligent than the average Man; whether due to Nature or Nurture, I know not, tho' I strongly suspect the latter, in view of certain scientifick Findings, that have likely been discuss'd elsewhere on this Forum.
Do you want me to write all this without using an 's' . . .
The medial
s (?) is use'd in the middle of words; the terminal
s (s) is used at the end of words. Instead of using the gamma-shaped capitalised long
s (?) at the beginning of words, I use the capitalised terminal
s (
S).
. . . and what are the words that must be capitalized?
Anything that is normally capitalised in contemporary English is capitalised, but also substantives (call'd Nouns) must be capitalised, as in German.
You capitalize Nordick Supremicism but not preposterous socialistic Doctrine---why?
I do not capitalise
preposterous and
socialistic because neither of them is a Substantive; I capitalise
Nordick because it refers to a specifick People (
viz., the Scandinavians), in Conformity with contemporary Usage.
Wrote Carl G,How jdo yu seel about the preponderanfe of evidenfe that fhowf that there if no fcientifick baifif for defignation of Earth Racef. JDo yu Arcturianf sind it goofie?
Sir, you are misusing the Letter
f, apparently mistaking it for the medial
s. As regards your question,?see above.