Are Races Equal?

[brian ross]

I think you need to reread Nom's post, Bogan if you believe she didn't talk about Genetics:

Modern biological concepts of race can be implemented objectively with molecular genetic data through hypothesis-testing. Genetic data sets are used to see if biological races exist in humans and in our closest evolutionary relative, the chimpanzee. Using the two most commonly used biological concepts of race, chimpanzees are indeed subdivided into races but humans are not.

Get back to us with some scientific evidence that is valid to support the concept of "race" - scientifically. Genetics is the final decider of the issue, pure and simple.

[Nom De Plume]

Hey Bogan! What shade of white are you?

[Bogan]

Brian Ross wrote

I think you need to reread Nom's post, Bogan if you believe she didn't talk about Genetics:

Wrong again, Brian. I told NDP that I did not respond to links (and I would like to add, cut and paste arguments' either).

If he/she wishes to submit the information in her cut and paste as a summary in her own words, in the form of a reasoned argument, then that is what I want. My reason for that demand is reasonable. Old Beowulf used to drown me in links instead of posting up any arguments himself. Whenever I found something in the link that was just plain potty, Beowulf would disown it by saying "well I disagreed with that myself" or "those are not my words." Finally, he provided a link with an ambiguous heading which he presumed supported his position but instead supported mine. I realised then that Beowulf was proving links that he never even read. Since then, others who have tried the same trick. No more. I provide arguments and I base those arguments upon books and media articles, and I expect my opponents to do the same. Links are only OK when providing corroboration.

[Nom De Plume]

Hey Bogan! What shade of white are you?

No response eh?

Well, I am pink... which I consider the most superior of shades. People with olive complexions are inferior to pink because they have been touched by darkies, at some stage in their genetic history. But not the pinkies.

[brian ross]

Brian Ross wrote

I think you need to reread Nom's post, Bogan if you believe she didn't talk about Genetics:

Wrong again, Brian. I told NDP that I did not respond to links (and I would like to add, cut and paste arguments' either).

If he/she wishes to submit the information in her cut and paste as a summary in her own words, in the form of a reasoned argument, then that is what I want. My reason for that demand is reasonable. Old Beowulf used to drown me in links instead of posting up any arguments himself. Whenever I found something in the link that was just plain potty, Beowulf would disown it by saying "well I disagreed with that myself" or "those are not my words." Finally, he provided a link with an ambiguous heading which he presumed supported his position but instead supported mine. I realised then that Beowulf was proving links that he never even read. Since then, others who have tried the same trick. No more. I provide arguments and I base those arguments upon books and media articles, and I expect my opponents to do the same. Links are only OK when providing corroboration.

Unwilling to accept a quote, hey? How primitive of you. How illiterate of you. Tsk, tsk. I always provide links to the EVIDENCE that supports my argument, Bogan. Just as you should. You'll never win an argument otherwise.

[Black Orchid]

I find it neither 'primitive' nor unreasonable to want someone to express their opinions/views in their own words.

[brian ross]

I find it neither 'primitive' nor unreasonable to want someone to express their opinions/views in their own words.

If you can provide evidence, be it in links or in quoted text with links, to support your argument that is perfectly fine and in fact it is better than just making a statement with out supporting evidence, which is what Bogan insists is the only sort of argument that he accepts. Tsk, tsk. Who is he to dictate how his opponents can argue?

[Black Orchid]

I find it neither 'primitive' nor unreasonable to want someone to express their opinions/views in their own words.

If you can provide evidence, be it in links or in quoted text with links, to support your argument that is perfectly fine and in fact it is better than just making a statement with out supporting evidence, which is what Bogan insists is the only sort of argument that he accepts. Tsk, tsk. Who is he to dictate how his opponents can argue?

The key words being "to support an argument". Enough said.

[Bogan]

NDP wrote

No response eh?

Well, I am pink... which I consider the most superior of shades. People with olive complexions are inferior to pink because they have been touched by darkies, at some stage in their genetic history. But not the pinkies.

I don't normally respond to sneery one liners, who's real intent is to disrupt the debate by heckling and tossing red herrings.

I think that we have established that you think races are equal. Now write at least 300 words justifying your position, or go and heckle and sneer somewhere else.

[Bogan]

Brian Ross wrote

Unwilling to accept a quote, hey? How primitive of you. How illiterate of you. Tsk, tsk. I always provide links to the EVIDENCE that supports my argument, Bogan. Just as you should. You'll never win an argument otherwise

I am doing very well at the moment. So well in fact that all you and NDP can do is heckle, sneer, and prevaricate to disrupt the debate.

Brian Ross wrote

If you can provide evidence, be it in links or in quoted text with links, to support your argument that is perfectly fine and in fact it is better than just making a statement with out supporting evidence, which is what Bogan insists is the only sort of argument that he accepts. Tsk, tsk. Who is he to dictate how his opponents can argue

Another red herring. There is nothing wrong with providing links or cut and paste's to support an argument, but I will not accept a cut and paste AS my opponents argument. For the reasons I have already given. Could we get back on topic now? Or do you still intend to prevaricate so that you can continue your disruption tactics?