Getting a passport is hardly an inconvenience.
|
Posted on 12/01/2003 11:28:35 PM PST by farmfriend
Bill Clinton called. He wants you to return his dictionary.
KA-POW! Congratulations, you knocked that one out of the park, sir.
Since you've just admitted that your National ID Card program won't accomplish its ostensible purpose, why are you wasting your time on it, unless you get some sort of pleasure at being told that you'd be more at home on DU than on FR?
Getting a passport is hardly an inconvenience.
|
Yeah, that's what he said.
as in, ANY difference in genetic heritage would have prevented western civilization from coming about?
He did not say "any difference." That's you putting words into his mouth.
"Without the genetic heritage" means that if the genetic heritage were dramatically different, Western Civlization would not have come about. Put it another way, if Europeans had the genetic heritage of Africans or Asians, Western Civilization as we know it would not have come about. There probably would have been some other civilization, but it would have been very different. Would it have been worse? I don't know, it may even have been better, but it would not be what we know of as Western.
DNA affects, but does not equal, destiny.
I'm sick of this discussion. Frankly, I don't have time for people whose radical universal humanist dogma blinds them to scientific facts.
You people are the geocentrists of the 21st century.
If you make people pay SI taxes, I think we have to give them the benefits that come with them.
|
No, it means that ANY change from THE (singular) genetic heritage of Europeans would have aborted Western Civilization.
Words mean things. Deal with it.
Put it another way, if Europeans had the genetic heritage of Africans or Asians, Western Civilization as we know it would not have come about.
Congratulations. You just said that environment doesn't mean squat.
I suppose that whether or not "intelligence", "creativity", and "talent" imply "superiority" depends on what the definition of "is" is....
If the test is crap, it would not predict income or intellectual success very well.
There are other things besides genetics that determine IQ, but genetics are at least 50% of it.
Your score keeps going up because you are becoming more and more familiar with the test and the types of questions it asks. Retaking a test tends to bias the score upwards, as anyone familiar with inteligence testing statistics knows.
Puh-leeze. You are using clintonspeak to evade the obvious fact that Mr. Francis' statement is a thinly veiled assertion that non-whites are genetically incapable of developing or maintaining a proper civilization.
How did this discussion get to social darwinism? Where did I mention social darwinism? I'm talking about mainstream genetics.
I agree with you that Christianity is a wonderful civilizing force, but it is not a necessary ingredient for civilization. There were civilizations on Earth 6000 years before Christianity was founded.
Mr. Francis never said that. Why does everyone insist on putting words into his mouth?
Nonsense. Federal immigration laws have been enforced for decades without doing any such thing.
All it takes is spot-checking known suspicious employers often enough, and setting the fines high enough, so that the "expected value" (the amount of the fine multiplied by the probability of getting caught) of the penalities exceeds the savings from hiring illegal aliens instead of citizens. That's Statistics 101.
This solution is far better than others I have seen. If you don't like it, that's your perogative, but I have no problem with this. I certainly consider it a better alternative than the present situation.
|
As explained in my previous message, your proposal is not necessary. Inasmuch as your proposal directs its burden at citizens rather than at illegal aliens, it is not proper.
Back to the drawing board for you, I'm afraid....
No, it does not mean any change. There is a good deal of variation within the genetic heritage of Europeans, so having a differnt genetic heritage would require a substantial difference in genetic patterns.
Congratulations. You just said that environment doesn't mean squat.
Where did I say that? Now you're putting words into my mouth.
You've just implied that Genetics don't mean squat and that the environment means everything, an assertion that flies in the face of all scientific data.
All I'm saying is that genetics are important. They are not everything. Environment is also important. But Genetics are important as well. They're both important.
If Europeans had the genetic heritage of Asians, they would not have developed a civilization very different from Asian civilization because of environmental differences. They would have developed a civilization different from Western Civilization because of genetic differences.
Why is it so hard for you to grasp that many factors, including genetics, environment, effort, and chance all matter?
If someone can improve their score by multiple standard deviations, what it says is that any genetic (in the broader sense of "genetic" -- of or relating to origins -- as opposed to DNA alone) component is incapable of reliable measurement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.