Why do PC Liberals hate/deny genetics so much?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Hold on there! As a conservative, I take issue.



Originally posted by WWu777


1. If all our behaviors are conditioned, why was I born with a fear of heights ever since I was a toddler? Who or what conditioned me to have a fear of heights?


Fear of heights is a mammalian response.


2. Why is there a proven correlation between race and IQ that transcends environment or upbringing? See here:
www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...
www.news-medical.net...


There isn't, really. As a mixed race individual, I've had the oppourtunity to study this aspect, since my masters degree is in Developmental Neurobiology.


3. Why do adopted children have IQ's that are closer to that of their biological parents than of their adopted parents?


Pre-natal care has a great deal to do with the development of the brain.


4. Why do fraternal twins separated at birth develop many of the same habits, personalities, choices and names, as studies show?


They are predispositioned to respond to outside stimulii in a similar manner.


I'm no liberal, but I'm going to have to side with the leftists (
) on this one.
edit on 26-10-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
Do liberals even care about truth? Or are they all about not offending others? What is the rationale or logic behind political correctness? Does the politically correct crowd really think that political correctness=truth?


Why did you frame your OP around a political opinion? It's just so tenuous.

Liberals have all kinds of different opinions about genetics and so do conservatives. Many would simply say they don't have the information to have an opinion. The PC-biology argument I only really see coming from people that want to reframe the issue to an advantage. In fact a lot of people (conservatives too!) only use genetics when it suits their bias or declare it false if it doesn't.

I don't believe everyone is biologically born equal. I do believe it's worth giving people the respect as if they are. That doesn't mean throwing common sense and logic out the window, but it does mean giving everyone a chance.


They seem to adopt such views like a religion, without thinking and without regard for evidence, logic or science.


I honestly doubt you're going to find a single person in this thread that doesn't acknowledge biological difference. I do think you're going to find a lot of persons not happy about the above statement.

Plenty of scientists vote liberal; I honestly think even if you remade this thread you will still have some work on your hands, but with the political stuff in it ... ? I hope you like upset people!



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SinMaker
Even though your a racist pig OP, you do have a point.

The reason we maintain political correctness is to ensure people like you don't kill innocent people you disagree with. Pretty simple.


Wow. What a leap. Suggesting that there are genetic differences between races amounts to wanting to "kill innocent people you disagree with".

Who knew?


Originally posted by SinMaker

I'm a proud libertarian left leaning liberal.


I suspect that you assume that other people have a soul ever darker than your own.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
I have some taboo but logical questions. Why do liberals and politically correct people always seem to deny the genetic factor in human behavior


Why do conservatives deny that homosexuality is caused by genetics? Instead we hear how it's a lifestyle choice and is curable through religion. If behaviors are driven by genetics, then sexual attraction to the same sex must also be driven by genetics.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kaploink

Why do conservatives deny that homosexuality is caused by genetics? Instead we hear how it's a lifestyle choice and is curable through religion. If behaviors are driven by genetics, then sexual attraction to the same sex must also be driven by genetics.


Is it not religious people who claim that homosexuality is a choice?



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
Why do liberals and politically correct people always seem to deny the genetic factor in human behavior, even though science says that 50 percent of our personality/behavior comes from our genes? What drives them to be so irrationally against the science of genes and their effect?
Whenever I ask them the following, they get stumped:

Allow me to "unstump" you.


1. If all our behaviors are conditioned, why was I born with a fear of heights ever since I was a toddler?

That's why nobody on earth really thinks that. The Nature vs. Nurture debate has ALWAYS been about which one has GREATER influence in WHICH CIRCUMSTANCES. Even if it wasn't...your own anecdotal observation doesn't qualify as "research" and is therefore not relevant.


2. Why is there a proven correlation between race and IQ that transcends environment or upbringing?

I've never heard anybody argue against that. Indeed, liberals often point out the vastly higher IQ scores of liberals over conservatives, blue states over red states, and atheists over "believers". The value of making reasonable conclusions based upon strong correlations is a time-honored tradition. However, given that we liberals are statistically speaking far more intelligent that conservatives we ALSO realize that for a given interpretation of this sort of statistical data to be valid, the sample must be random and a substantial deviation from a Normal Distribution is indicative and evidentiary of improper testing procedure. Thus, when we see a given ethnicity w/ average lower scores across a random sample than another ethnicity at first glance it appears as though one ethnicity might be "superior" to another. However, when running those same tests in a random sample which is delineated by a GIVEN, FIXED, PHYSICAL TRAIT which BY DEFINITION CANNOT be influenced by one's upbringing (such as race) and we STILL find that the distribution is right-skewed, it absolutely, categorically, and mathematically PROVES that the test itself is inherently biased against said ethnicity. To argue against this conclusion is quite literally doesn't "believe" in Algebra. Speaking strictly in a mathematical sense, the relative probability of you both knowing and understanding this concept in advance of this discussion would be exponentially higher if you were more intelligent. However, it should be noted that IF this were actually true, then it would be highly unlikely that we would even be having this conversation since it would be highly improbable that you would be either a conservative or a racist. Specifically, the mathematical equation which describes these relative probabilities can be found here:



3. Why do adopted children have IQ's that are closer to that of their biological parents than of their adopted parents?

See above.


4. Why do fraternal twins separated at birth develop many of the same habits, personalities, choices and names, as studies show?

They don't. Paternal twins separated at birth are more likely to exhibit these traits. However, in most of the studies which have been done the twins who were separated were raised in similar circumstances. For example...both of them being adopted by middle class American families. However, we now know that environmental factors result in certain genes "switching on or off". Thus, we are just now at the very, earliest beginnings of being able to comprehend how the complex web of "Nature vs. Nurture" affects the genetic code itself. To date, there has not been really been any studies performed in which paternal twins were separated at birth are raised in environments that are significantly different enough to necessitate a different set of adaptations for survival/success. However, I would surmise that the day we take a hundred pairs of paternal twins and raise in suburban America and the other as a ¡Kung! Bushman that we find some rather remarkable differences in their habits, personalities, and preferences.


Politically correct liberals can never address these questions. I get no answers from them. Why is that?

Are you sure you just aren't understanding the answers? There is a strong correlation between low IQ's and your political views, after all.

Regardless. I am glad I could finally answer all of these questions for you in a clear, concise, and straight forward manner. Please let me know if you would like me to review any of the parts that are confusing you, or provide you additional reading materials to get you up to speed on these issues.

I am happy to do so, and a very, very, patient teacher.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Props to you beezzer!

We don't agree on much...but I'm glad to see you aren't backing this nonsense.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kaploink

Originally posted by WWu777
I have some taboo but logical questions. Why do liberals and politically correct people always seem to deny the genetic factor in human behavior


Why do conservatives deny that homosexuality is caused by genetics? Instead we hear how it's a lifestyle choice and is curable through religion. If behaviors are driven by genetics, then sexual attraction to the same sex must also be driven by genetics.


Oh...didn't anybody tell you that genetics is only responsible for behavioral traits, innate abilities, and preferences when it's convenient?

Thus, when one wants to make oneself out to be somehow racially superior..."that's genetics". Conversely, when a homosexual claims the same for their sexual orientation...then "that's evil".

See how that works? Damn convenient, isn't it?



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SinMaker
Even though your a racist pig OP, you do have a point. There are differences in people of color, culture and orientation. No reason to deny that. But your focus is more about negative sterotypes than using reason. The reason we maintain political correctness is to ensure people like you don't kill innocent people you disagree with. Pretty simple. I'm a proud libertarian left leaning liberal.


I'm eager to OP's response to me. I showed him in no uncertain terms that what he's asserting is not mathematically possible and even gave him the equation to boot.

I can't wait to hear him argue with Algebra.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder
Thus, when we see a given ethnicity w/ average lower scores across a random sample than another ethnicity at first glance it appears as though one ethnicity might be "superior" to another. However, when running those same tests in a random sample which is delineated by a GIVEN, FIXED, PHYSICAL TRAIT which BY DEFINITION CANNOT be influenced by one's upbringing (such as race) and we STILL find that the distribution is right-skewed, it absolutely, categorically, and mathematically PROVES that the test itself is inherently biased against said ethnicity. To argue against this conclusion is quite literally doesn't "believe" in Algebra. Speaking strictly in a mathematical sense, the relative probability of you both knowing and understanding this concept in advance of this discussion would be exponentially higher if you were more intelligent. However, it should be noted that IF this were actually true, then it would be highly unlikely that we would even be having this conversation since it would be highly improbable that you would be either a conservative or a racist. Specifically, the mathematical equation which describes these relative probabilities can be found here:


I really, really don't want to get involved in this argument because arguments about race never go down well
But the anger and hate you spoke with here really got to me. So, I'll make this 1 post and get out of this thread

Someone's chart of S&P 500 returns:



Does the S&P 500 exist?


I dunno man, just speak with less hate and more love.

And I'll leave this thread that will almost assuredly turn into a huge flame-fest now!
edit on 10/26/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)
edit on 10/26/12 by RedDragon because: to explain why i'm leaving the thread
edit on 10/26/12 by RedDragon because: clarification?
edit on 10/26/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedDragon

I really, really don't want to get involved in this argument because arguments about race never go down well
But the anger and hate you spoke with here really got to me.

What anger and hate? I simply answered the guys question and acknowledged that us liberals absolutely and wholeheartedly appreciate the value of strong statistical correlations then patiently took the time to explain the math to him in a manner which he can comprehend, given his clear and obvious trouble with interpreting statistical data correctly.

What exactly are you talking about?


Someone's chart of S&P 500 returns:



Does the S&P 500 exist?


Huh?

I vote this to be the most puzzling and mysterious question ever posed on ATS. Ever.
It's not even really a question. And what does the chart have to do with anything anyways?

I'm speculating you are more conservative-leaning in your politics?



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Wow. So lets see. Liberals are Nazis. Nazis believed in the gentics you speak of. You say liberals don't believe in it. I don't think it is a liberal / conservative issue.

Quite frankly I really don't get what you are trying to say.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by aethertek

Originally posted by WWu777

David Duke argued that differences in human races is akin to differences in dog breeds in his documentary about preserving human diversity and freedom here

edit on 26-10-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)



Don't even bother with this guy.
Anyone who quotes David Duke the neo-nazi isn't worth the time to respond to.
Perhaps he should go hang out on stormfronts website.
edit on 26-10-2012 by aethertek because: Removed the racist link.


That is a myth. If you look at David Duke's website, articles and videos, there is nothing racist in them.



There is no myth about it, David Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the Klan.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by SinMaker
Even though your a racist pig OP, you do have a point. There are differences in people of color, culture and orientation. No reason to deny that. But your focus is more about negative sterotypes than using reason. The reason we maintain political correctness is to ensure people like you don't kill innocent people you disagree with. Pretty simple. I'm a proud libertarian left leaning liberal.


I'm eager to OP's response to me. I showed him in no uncertain terms that what he's asserting is not mathematically possible and even gave him the equation to boot.

I can't wait to hear him argue with Algebra.


A very weak response as referenced in a prior post. He has no interesting responses. His entire premise is all about hate. Anyone that signs on to his paradigm might as well tattoo themselves with Hitlers emblems.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
9/10 posters on this thread are clouded with the PC train of thought.

Maybe the OP didn't put into context correctly but the OP is right. You are all on the internet so therefore you have the tools such as a search engine to research what the OP is speaking about.

On about the IQ and races; granted IQ isn't a set in stone way to recognize intelligence, per se but many statitistics from around the world show the same correlation. The same correlation can be found with children that are adopted. For example, If a Negroid was adopted, from birth, by an East Asian family that child would still score lower on the IQ charts for East Asians but a tad higher for Negroids raised by their own. So, upbringing does play a role, no doubt, but genetics is far more powerful.

As I stated, You all have access to search engines and don't just click on 2 or 3 links. Do a thorough study and You will see that the OP is right.

BTW, Rushton had decades of scientifically proof to back up his "theories", to argue with that would be biased.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mahatche

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by aethertek

Originally posted by WWu777

David Duke argued that differences in human races is akin to differences in dog breeds in his documentary about preserving human diversity and freedom here

edit on 26-10-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)



Don't even bother with this guy.
Anyone who quotes David Duke the neo-nazi isn't worth the time to respond to.
Perhaps he should go hang out on stormfronts website.
edit on 26-10-2012 by aethertek because: Removed the racist link.


That is a myth. If you look at David Duke's website, articles and videos, there is nothing racist in them.



There is no myth about it, David Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the Klan.


So he's a racist because he was grand wizard of the KKK but the NBPP aren't racist even though there is documentation of them calling out to kill all white babies?

SMH.

Stop being so narrow minded.

PC will be the downfall of western civilization. Look at Detroit. Debate me on that.

I will leave with one quote that a majority of a particular race obide by and it is "It takes a village". That philosophy takes the responsability away from the parents. Add that to Low IQ and what do you have? An extremely high crime rate. (FBI statistics will back that up, again, use your search engine)
edit on 26-10-2012 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Whenever I ask them the following, they get stumped:

1. If all our behaviors are conditioned, why was I born with a fear of heights ever since I was a toddler? Who or what conditioned me to have a fear of heights?

Odds are pretty good you had fallen at some point in your life, or been dropped, or received pain somehow from a fall at one point in time. (Toddlers often fall while learning to walk.)

2. Why is there a proven correlation between race and IQ that transcends environment or upbringing? See here:
www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...
www.news-medical.net...

"(An) incendiary thesis....that separate races of human beings evolved different reproductive strategies to cope with different environments and that these strategies led to physical differences in brain size and hence in intelligence" The very first sentence of your first source. There are also many studies that show that the human race cannot be divided into subspecies, aka we are all one race no matter what color you are.

3. Why do adopted children have IQ's that are closer to that of their biological parents than of their adopted parents?

I would wager a bet that this is unsubstantiated and that the adopted children could have both higher and lower IQ's that the adoptive parents. It more depends on how the child learns than anything because the IQ test itself is completely uncorrelated to intelligence and only measures a certain style of learning.

4. Why do fraternal twins separated at birth develop many of the same habits, personalities, choices and names, as studies show?

For the same reason that a large amount of children develop the same way in different families. People themselves have many commonalities from generation to generation, along with children are often exposed to the same things in the media, which in turn creates these generational similarities. Many children watch the same television shows, the same movies, play the same games, and live in the same type of places as others.

Furthermore, why do liberals emphatically claim that there are no differences between races or groups of people, other than cultural or individual differences? Consider this: We acknowledge that animals, such as dogs and cats, have different behaviors and temperaments based on their breed and color. A German Shepherd for example, has a very different personality than a Golden Retriever. And black cats are more wild and independent than white cats, while tabby cats are more friendly, warm and cuddly. Obviously, these animal differences are not due to culture or environment. So if different colors and breeds are correlated with different animal traits and temperaments, why wouldn't it be the same for human races? Why are innate differences between human races a taboo? What's the logic behind that?

Why do you keep saying liberals? It's not just liberals who believe these things. The reason people say these things are because it can be backed up by facts. Dogs are not different based upon breed and color alone. I've seen German Shepherds that were the nicest dogs on the planet and wouldn't care if they ever met you before or not, they would still want to be your best friend. I've also seen some that would have ripped my throat out had I come too close. I've seen cats such as tabbies that wouldn't leave you alone and would always want attention, and I've also seen tabbies that would do nothing but hiss, bite, and scratch. It's all how they were raised. The same reason I've seen dogs and cats that got along, and I've seen dogs that would rip cats to shreds. If it was all natural then we would have no need to try to correct or punish people or animals when they do things that we consider wrong and reward those who do what society wishes of them.

And why is political correctness so popular, especially among young people, and especially among females? It's almost like a fad or trend among young people (especially females) to hold politically correct views such as "there are no differences between groups or races, only cultural and individual differences exist" etc. They seem to adopt such views like a religion, without thinking and without regard for evidence, logic or science.

This paragraph is very telling about you...

One more quick thing. If you have never heard of the "wild children" of Europe you may find it an interesting read. One I know was raised by wolves for the first part of his life.
edit on 26-10-2012 by Deadlychicken because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Deadlychicken
 


Wrong on all of your rebuttals. Google is your friend. But, because of this being a PC issue, It will take more than just 3 or 4 links to come up with an accurate conclusion. Check out like 20 links, draw an unbiased conclusion from what you have learned and then respond back.

~What would Jesus do?~



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I just want to add one thing to the conversation, hormone levels are a key proponent in this issue. Stats world wide of various races and social upbringings show an Ironic correlation. Prove me wrong and I will stand corrected.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by Deadlychicken
 


Wrong on all of your rebuttals. Google is your friend. But, because of this being a PC issue, It will take more than just 3 or 4 links to come up with an accurate conclusion. Check out like 20 links, draw an unbiased conclusion from what you have learned and then respond back.

~What would Jesus do?~


Could you please tell me what was wrong with my view of the experiences I've had in my life?





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join