- #176
BlackVision
- 28
- 1
Evo I believe the admins on this board will be happy to hear that you called many of them uneducated.
When you're fooling around, it's acceptable, because you're not trying to hold an intellectual discussion. You however ARE trying to hold an intellectual discussion.BlackVision said:Evo I believe the admins on this board will be happy to hear that you called many of them uneducated.
What are you talking about? These are full length debates. Go read them yourself. It's not like I'm going to post entire debates here. You're just mad cause you're getting told. :DEvo said:When you're fooling around, it's acceptable, because you're not trying to hold an intellectual discussion. You however ARE trying to hold an intellectual discussion.
How would I know? You think I bothered reading ALL the posts that contained the word "gonna"? You have any idea how many that is? Do a search and see the listings.It is so funny that you would go to such lengths to see if I ever used any of those words! Found out I don't, right?
A lot. As I have just proven. :rofl:Evo said:Who else here talks like that?
No one uses all of the gramatically incorrect words you do. If you exclude those where English is not their first language and those that are not academic discussions, you'll have virtually nothing left.BlackVision said:A lot. As I have just proven. :rofl:
Yeah, actually I was watching you read all of those posts and was wondering why. I watch that part to find threads that might be of interest and saw you looking at an odd variety of threads. You were trying to see if I was the one that said "gonna". You are obsessed.BlackVision said:How would I know? You think I bothered reading ALL the posts that contained the word "gonna"? You have any idea how many that is? Do a search and see the listings.
You sure go to great lengths to show your spite.
Um quite a lot of PF admins and PF mentors seemed to have used the words. Are you really going to make me search for "wanna" as well? Come on I dare you to make this request. If the list comes out similiar, showing the same PF admins and PF mentors using them, you will agree to concede that you have made a mockery of yourself deal?No one uses all of the gramatically incorrect words you do. If you exclude those where English is not their first language and those that are not academic discussions, you'll have virtually nothing left.
The fact is that you have shown you don't know any other way to speak.
Actually searching for if you ever said the word "gonna" I never did. If I wanted to do that, I would have included your name in the search field. I never did. I was only comprising a short list of people that have used the word "gonna" Many of course, came out to be some of the most respected people on this board.Yeah, actually I was watching you read all of those posts and was wondering why. I watch that part to find threads that might be of interest and saw you looking at an odd variety of threads. You were trying to see if I was the one that said "gonna". You are obsessed.
Using a slang word occasionally is one thing, when they comprise your entire vocabulary, that is something completely different.BlackVision said:Um quite a lot of PF admins and PF mentors seemed to have used the words. Are you really going to make me search for "wanna" as well? Come on I dare you to make this request. If the list comes out similiar, showing the same PF admins and PF mentors using them, you will agree to concede that you have made a mockery of yourself deal?
Yes, and one was using it in a "quote", as an imitation. Another used it humorously to say he was too tired to continue writing. They are not using slang in place of regular words on a consistant basis the way you are. Big difference.BlackVision said:Actually searching for if you ever said the word "gonna" I never did. If I wanted to do that, I would have included your name in the search field. I never did. I was only comprising a short list of people that have used the word "gonna" Many of course, came out to be some of the most respected people on this board.
You have to first state that you will agree that you have made a complete mockery of yourself if the results match. No ifs, ands, or buts. None of this "i'm going to twist my story here and there as new evidence comes in" You look like a fundamental christian that goes "yes the Earth was created in 6 days" and once dinosaur fossils are discovered change it to "oh no no what I meant was that a day is just a figure of speech which could equal 100 million years" So if you're going to waste my time, you will have to agree to concede once the facts come in and will not use the creationist tactic.Evo said:Yes, please do a search on wanna.
LOL. Forget the "wanna" I think we'll do this one instead. You want me to show PF admins and mentors repeatedly using the word "gonna" over and over, post after post? Cause I can do that.Evo said:Yes, and one was using it in a "quote", as an imitation. Another used it humorously to say he was too tired to continue writing. They are not using slang in place of regular words on a consistant basis the way you are. Big difference.
Thanks. Good information. Here's another one. www.ersys.comwww.city-data.com for anyone interested in looking at more information about differences among various cities cited in this debate, particularly in terms of median house value relative to median income, and a plethora of information about cities other than the select few listed here, cities that show opposite trends than those presented. Anyone interested can go to the site and draw your own conclusions.
BlackVision, one of my pet peeves is grammar, sorry I went off on you, but can you try to use at least some proper grammar?BlackVision said:You have to first state that you will agree that you have made a complete mockery of yourself if the results match. No ifs, ands, or buts. None of this "i'm going to twist my story here and there as new evidence comes in" You look like a fundamental christian that goes "yes the Earth was created in 6 days" and once dinosaur fossils are discovered change it to "oh no no what I meant was that a day is just a figure of speech which could equal 100 million years" So if you're going to waste my time, you will have to agree to concede once the facts come in and will not use the creationist tactic.
But try using your own logic...eh maybe the standard definition of logic, not your own. If a person uses the word "gonna", why on Earth would they have any objection whatsoever with using the world "wanna" Sometimes using simply logic is the best way to go.
My use of spelling and grammar is not severely flawed. Everyone makes a mistake here and there from the hundreds to thousands of posts people type and that is very well expected. This would include you as well I am quite sure. But come on, cause and 'cause, that is very ticky tacky.Evo said:BlackVision, one of my pet peeves is grammar, sorry I went off on you, but can you try to use at least some proper grammar?
I was upset with Moonbear very delicately handpicking certain lines from that article while completely ignoring lines that say the contrary. I also got more upset when she stated that there were no difference in year 2 or year 7 in testosterone level between white and black when her own study that she posted showed differently. I don't know if it was on purpose or not but honestly is crucial in a debate.Evo said:Can you please refrain from calling people liars and making condescending remarks when you reply to posts? It is very tiresome and makes discussion difficult.
BlackVision said:Ok first off you would have to equalize the environment. Comparing America to Russia does not work. My original point was that gaps exist WITHIN a country. I never brought this country to country comparision into the debate. Mainly cause the political and economical structure from country to country is excessively drastic to warrant any fair comparison. So I don't have a prove a thing in this retrospect.
White is anyone of the Caucasian race. This does include the Middle East and this group will inflate the score if there's a heavy surplus of them. (UK groups Middle East with Asian however) Asian is Far East and the Southeast Race. The Southeast will inflate the score. Black is the Sub-Sahara race. From what I know there isn't a particular Sub-Sahara group that will inflate the score and is quite even across the board.
You're right the burden is on me to support evidence for the gap and I did just that. Comparison of white, asian, blacks in countries that have these volumes. I provided US and United Kingdom. The same gap exists in Australia, Canada, and other countries that have volumes of these races. I have seen statistics for these countries before and will post them once I find them again. But like i said WITHIN a country, the gaps are very consistent.
NoahAfrican said:I would like to know the motivation which lead BV to conclude that inter country homicide statistics could not be compared to the USA, because there was not an equalization of environment. If his abstract point is true, then why does he not see that the same argument can be made towards intra-country homicide statistics? The fallacy I see in BV’s reasoning is that he erroneously assumes that intra-country racial homicide statistics has an equalization of environment for the races.
Thus, in order to equalize the environments, whites need to experience the same degree of enslavement, subordination and mistreatment as have blacks in this nation, in degree and kind.
I will agree that homogenous nations experience less problems with violence than does heterogeneous nations. However, the reason that most nations are heterogeneous are linked to European imperialism, colonization and forced enslavement and transportation of people against there will. Also, most of the conflicts in the world, such as civil wars and wars with neighboring countries are the butterfly effect emanating from the initial actions of European nations colonizing and creating borders to serve its imperialistic purposes. The resultant was that non-homogenous peoples or tribes were grouped together under on nation and pitted against one and other to keep the nation divided and conquered. In other cases homogenous peoples were split by borders and today fight to have their former territory back.
I could go on and on but I think you get my point. It is one thing to have the ability to note statistics. However, statistics do not explain the WHY. Just throwing out statistics that are negative only serves the purpose of the doctrine of racial inferiority/superiority racism.
PS...also, let me add that homogenous black nations have homicide rates that are among the lowest in the world. For example, Burkina Faso, Benin and Camaroon have extremely low homicide rates. Given that many of this current black nations are the roots of a blacks in in the West, one must therefore conclude that it is something about the western (white culture) that creates such an environment that is conducive to this type of criminal behavior.
In 1990, there were an estimated 1,851,000 violence related deaths (35.3 per 100,000) in the world (table 1 and fig 1). Overall rates of violence related deaths ranged from 12.5 per 100,000 in EME excluding the United States (-US) to 101.0 per 100,000 in SSA. Rates of violence related deaths were highest in SSA, MEC, and ESE and lowest in EME (-US). In 1990, an estimated 3.7% of all deaths in the world were violence related (table 2). Suicide was the most frequent form of violent death followed by homicide and then war related deaths. The global risk of suicide was 1.7 times that of war related deaths and 1.4 times that of homicide. Violence accounted for a greater proportion of total deaths in SSA than in any other region of the world (table 2).
I guess that you are correct. Alongside your name, the number of posts accredited to you is just over 300. Yet, if you have posted hundreds of thousands, then you are certainly due your number of typos.BlackVision said:Everyone makes a mistake here and there from the hundreds to thousands of posts people type and that is very well expected.
Yes, I agree again. These are the only 2 options possible.On this board, I will speak as if I'm in a social gathering, rather than as if it was a major speech or if I'm writing my thesis.
Yes, just look around. Most everyone on this forum speaks like you, right? Well, at least you do.Which probably means the word "gonna" and "wanna" will show up. Even if you do not use these words very often or at all, you should understand that many do.
My, you must run in poorly educated circles. I can't remember the last time I heard anyone older than 10 use gonna.Regardless of level of education. I can't remember the last time I've ever heard someone say "Well I'm going to go now" rather than "Well I'm going to go now"
Stick to your guns. Don't let the quality of your peers bring out the better side of your grammar. Continue to equate decent grammar with "term paper" grammar. Don't strive to better yourself to the level of your peers, but instead try to bring them down to your level.Social gatherings are different from formal presentations. It's not like I use "gonna" when I write term papers.
Due to the reason that the differences from country comparison lie predominately political. SES have repeatedly been shown to have little effect as far as murder rates and crime goes and it seems as though that is what you are trying to argue.NoahAfrican said:I would like to know the motivation which lead BV to conclude that inter country homicide statistics could not be compared to the USA, because there was not an equalization of environment. If his abstract point is true, then why does he not see that the same argument can be made towards intra-country homicide statistics? The fallacy I see in BV’s reasoning is that he erroneously assumes that intra-country racial homicide statistics has an equalization of environment for the races.
Once again, why does this not apply for Jews. Arguably the most oppresed group in history. They went through a genoicide which I assure you is much worst than slavery. Not to mention it's far more recent in history. Do you see them with a high crime rate?Thus, for a people to spend 3 centuries in various degrees of violent oppression will no doubt reverberate a reaction upon the present and future.
Not even. The crime a nation suffers is directly in proportion to the ethnic makeup of it's population. Homogeneous African nations do have extraordinarily high crime rate. People talk about the high crime rate of America all the time. How it's so much higher than other 1st world nations. And yes it is true, America has a higher crime rate than any other 1st world country. But when you actually extract the black and hispanic statistics, you will notice it comes VERY close to the European crime rate.I will agree that homogenous nations experience less problems with violence than does heterogeneous nations.
And most Jews are Holocaust survivors. What is your point?As I stated, nearly all of the blacks in the western hemisphere come by virtue of enslavement and transport to these places by Whites.
It isn't for negativity or for racial inferiority or superiority. If it is for the better understanding of human nature and human behavior. Instead of trying so hard to look for the prettiest answer or the politically correct one, we should be trying to find the truth.Just throwing out statistics that are negative only serves the purpose of the doctrine of racial inferiority/superiority racism.
No one argued that. But it does not mean slight differences do not exist.NoahAfrican said:Be that as it may, even though humans genetics and experiences are all different, we are still much more similar than we are different, especially in regards to genetics.
If you have any evidence to support this stance, I will be here. But it seems quite consistent in that blacks have the highest crime rate wherever they are. And asians have lower crime rate than whites, even if they are 1st wave immigrants that are poor.Thus, varying rates of homicides between races is linked to environment and not genetics, as what is being implied here by omission.
I'm sorry to say that it is you that is misinformed. South Africa is the only African nation that is even remotely successful in terms of development. They actually have phones and electricity and running water. It is also the civilization that White Europeans built and where the White Europeans still live. To think that South Africa could be where it is today, a GDP per capita of 20 times that of other African nations, without Europeans, would be quite absurd.It is true of South Africa, Namibia and other countries where whites violently oppressed the indigenous population in the quest for land, wealth and power as they chose new homelands.
Ah because if I searched all your posts, I will not find one single error correct? What do I win if I find one?Prometheus said:I guess that you are correct. Alongside your name, the number of posts accredited to you is just over 300. Yet, if you have posted hundreds of thousands, then you are certainly due your number of typos.
That is correct.Yes, just look around. Most everyone on this forum speaks like you, right?
Incorrect, I attend a university that is one of the most prominent universities of this nation.My, you must run in poorly educated circles.
Yes yes because most people, including intellectuals, say "going to run" instead of "gotta run" correct? Common sense seems to be something you lack here.I can't remember the last time I heard anyone older than 10 use gonna.
If that was the case, I would never use contractions and neither would you. But I noticed you just said "don't" When's the last time you heard a President in a speech say "don't"? You will notice Presidential speeches as well as most formal speeches avoid contractions. And what is "gonna"? All that is is a contraction which YOU YOURSELF used just now. So it seems as though you have some work to do.Don't let the quality of your peers bring out the better side of your grammar. Continue to equate decent grammar with "term paper" grammar. Don't strive to better yourself to the level of your peers, but instead try to bring them down to your level.
NoahAfrican said:Thus, varying rates of homicides between races is linked to environment and not genetics,
Where is the proof of this? And I think that this contradicts to this:The Africans who were brought to the West were never enslaved by other Africans.
In Africa, prior to Arab and White influence, slavery was simply the resultant of war and what to do with war captives, or the punitive price for societal transgression such as crimes. These so called slaves had nearly all the rights and privileges as non head of household members of a family that owned them.
According to your 'Butterfly effect' reasoning you can extrapolate that anyone who breathed 200 years ago is responsible for every sin commited today. You are using this reasoning as a tool to insult and pin blame upon the whites.In fact, when Iraq invaded Kuwait they did so under the rational that Kuwait is historically part of Iraq, but the British made separate entities after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Thus, whites and not Islam, was the cause of the first gulf war.
In regards to homicides rates in sub Saharan Africa being the highest in the world, that is simply more misinformation. It is true of South Africa, Namibia and other countries where whites violently oppressed the indigenous population in the quest for land, wealth and power as they chose new homelands. However, there are 50 black African nations and what is true for a few parts cannot be assumed true for the whole, which many people out of ignorance or malice intent of making blacks look as if they are there worst enemy.
BlackVision said:What do I win if I find one?
How do you define racism? If I were to accept that Jews are far more likely to obtain Tay-Sachs is that racism? If I accept that Blacks are far more likely to obtain sickle cell would that be racism? Has political correctness become far more important than accuracy and honesty? Would you go as far as to deny any differences between races whatsoever that would be advantageous to one race to another regardless of the evidence behind it?Loren Booda said:The statistics this thread misrepresents will eventually expose its own worldview of racism.
What is this? Zero refute to anything I have stated? Ah yes. I found it quite solid myself.Prometheus said:Your posting is hilarious.
You place such stress on your conclusions, which you draw on the basis of your own fabricated presuppositions.
I think that you might consider becoming a political speech writer.
Thank you Averagesupernova. I appreciate your thoughts.Averagesupernova said:I want to add something to this thread concerning the wanna, gonna, cause, etc. B.S.
Some of you are hitting below the belt with this crap. You acuse BV of trying to pull everyone else down to his 'lowly' level. You compare BV to a 10 year old. Let's please give BV the benefit of the doubt concerning his story. You imply that you are above BV by saying that you NEVER speak that way. You acuse BV of forging identification. You acuse BV of having his way paid by mom and dad. By doing all of this you are basically putting yourselves above BV. Nothing like stomping on someone else to raise your own self up. By doing these things you have just drawn a line in the sand that separates you from others. By acting like this you are not doing your cause any good.
I read a lot of internet forums and when someone sinks to the level of nit-picking grammar, typos and things of this nature I usually determine that those who are doing the nit-picking have just run out of valid arguments to support their case and quite likely ARE 10 year olds. It seems you have more interest in winning the argument then anything else. Can you just bow out politely if you've run out of constructive input? Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying EITHER side is correct. But I DO suspect that the pot is calling the kettle black.