"Only the unenlightened fascist thugs of the left would have the science editor at the New York Times fired for publishing a book on the genetic inferiority of those people when it's the settled, scientific truth. Besides, none of them could possibly be smart as I am, anyway."
--Vox Day, Vox Popoli
Bonus Verbatim Stupid:
The Left is more than uncomfortable with both science and the conclusions that logically follow from it. It is now openly and avowedly anti-science. What is fascinating is that most clueless Leftists still feverishly insist that they, and not the Right, are pro-science even as they reject it in favor of various nonexistent ideals. As I have repeatedly pointed out since last August, the time for tolerating the Left has passed. Your only choice now is to submit to them or to shatter them.
Remember kids, climate change, massive hoax perpetrated by thousands of scientists. Black people are genetically inferior to white people, settled scientific because you guys Vox Day is really, really smart and he listens to this guy who says so.
But the left is "openly and avowedly anti-science".
Posts
4 comments:
Apparently the scoop is also not true, at least not yet. Wikipedia editors removed the announcement of Wade's leaving the Times from his biography about an hour after after it was entered http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicholas_Wade&diff=608118071&oldid=608106382. DC's "evidence" (Wade has had a Times byline since April 24) is meaningless (he does about 10 articles a year so it's no surprise if he hasn't shown up in three weeks). The commenters' idea of "settled science" is astonishing.
Indeed - my statistics professor used "The Bell Curve" in class as an example of really bad statistical analysis. The problem with The Bell Curve, as with all such studies, is that one's genetic background affects one's environment. Put a beautiful blonde supermodel look-alikes in the same room with, say, a Rick Moranes look-alike - and they will be treated very differently by others in the room.
Until one can come up with a mathematical relationship explaining this difference, one simply cannot run meaningful statistical analyses on the effect of one's genetic background on intelligence - all the statistical tools rely on the variables being studied to be mutually-independent. As one's genetic background affects one's environment, these variables are not mutually independent - making the statistical tools worthless.
How very interesting. Daily Caller wrong about something factual? Shocking!
I know right. In other local news the sun rose this morning. Check out how they made a correction this morning while scrubbing the evidence of what it was they were correcting.
Post a Comment