Denmark Vesey: The Bell Curve Replaced By "The DV Curve"

Saturday, March 13, 2010

The Bell Curve Replaced By "The DV Curve"

I think it's worth repeating what I've said before regarding "The Bell Curve."

It's not that "The Bell Curve" persuaded me of anything. It was the feebleness of the arguments from all the Establishment egalitarianist scholars who lined up to debunk it.

If the premise of "The Bell Curve" was so manifestly absurd... the egalitarianists should be able to knock it down with ease.

In my point of view, though, they haven't. The less scrupulous among them, such as Nulan, merely resort to leftist bullying tactics.

Where stand you, DV, on the premise that different human sub-groups might have (generally speaking) different cognitive capacities due to genetics?
Denmark Vesey said ...
Beware The Tyranny of The Mediocre

Mills I reject the established group identity myths of "black" and "white" presuming those are examples of the "sub-groups" of which you speak.

I'm the product of a 1,000 years of selective breeding, so I like to think cognitive advantage is distributed more along class and culture lines than mere color.

The subgroup with the most apparent demonstration of cognitive advantage is a group I call: Good Looking Healthy people.

What's smarter than that?

Thus I thwart the Hegelian dialectic of Mr. Bell (thesis) and the "Egalitarianist Scholars" (anti-thesis) and avoid the stagnation (synthesis) of race competition. Change the game.

114 comments:

Intellectual Insurgent said...: Now that's what I'm talkin' about! :-); Feb 6, 2009, 3:14:00 PM
Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...: 02 06 09

Heheheheheh And to Mills:
Any true scholar would know that they took statistics and bastardized them the same way finaciers did on Wall STreet. Look where that got us!; Feb 6, 2009, 5:40:00 PM
Anonymous said...: That's a noble idea DV but, it won't work. One reason that there is unlikely to ever be a big revolution in this country is people are too easily divided in a multicultural society. Races and different ethnic groups are too busy one- uping each other.; Feb 6, 2009, 7:32:00 PM
Anonymous said...: 911 might of been a lie but look it helped us!; Feb 6, 2009, 7:32:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 6, 2009, 9:31:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"I think it's worth repeating what I've said before regarding "The Bell Curve."

It's not that "The Bell Curve" persuaded me of anything. It was the feebleness of the arguments from all the Establishment egalitarianist scholars who lined up to debunk it.

If the premise of "The Bell Curve" was so manifestly absurd... the egalitarianists should be able to knock it down with ease."

Mills has steadfastly avoided answering this question:

How do Herrnstein and Murray, if they do so at all, define "black people" and "white people"?

Go to your copy of the book and let us know, if you would, please.

"Where stand you, DV, on the premise that different human sub-groups might have (generally speaking) different cognitive capacities due to genetics?"

Define "different human-sub group".

Maybe male children age 3 of height X and weight Y?

Maybe humans with two-inch left thumbs?

Which "human sub-groups" are you talking about, Mills?; Feb 6, 2009, 9:33:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Which "human sub-groups" are you talking about, Mills?

On a theoretical level, I'm talking about any human sub-groups, Fish. However an investigator might choose to divide them.

Do men, on average, have different cognitive capacities than women?

Do left-handed people, generally speaking, have different cognitive capacities than right-handed people?

Do dwarfs have different cognitive capacities than normal-sized humans?

On a practical level, though, one partition of human sub-groups has real-world policy implications (in multiracial societies):

Those of African descent compared to those of European descent and those of Asian descent.

Affirmative action is built upon an ideological belief that any comparative deficiencies in performance on intelligence tests by black folks must be the result of white racism.

But what if that's not true?; Feb 6, 2009, 9:50:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: "Affirmative action is built upon an ideological belief that ...."

that victim status is a path to empowerment.

Blacks got slavery.

Jews got the Holocaust.

Homos got that manufactured marriage issue.

Mills, I'll bet you in an "intelligence test" designed by people of Asian decent - Asians probably score pretty well.

In an "intelligence test" designed by people of African decent, I'll betcha Africans score pretty well.

In an "intelligence test" designed by DV, handsome smooth cool brothas with Coco Butta complexions are going to score very well.

Mills, why are you so eager to submit to a definition of intelligence designed by spiritually retarded secular fanatics with no game?

How "intelligent" is it to build a nuclear bomb?; Feb 6, 2009, 10:38:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Mills, I'll bet you in an "intelligence test" designed by people of Asian decent - Asians probably score pretty well.

Actually western intelligent tests were created by whites and Asians outscore them.; Feb 6, 2009, 10:57:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Mills, I'll bet you in an "intelligence test" designed by people of Asian decent - Asians probably score pretty well.

Well, in intelligence tests designed by whites... Asians tend to score higher than whites. So what does that tell you, DV?; Feb 6, 2009, 10:59:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Damn... I get beat on the draw by an Anonymous? I shouldn't have went to pee.; Feb 6, 2009, 11:00:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"On a theoretical level, I'm..."

You haven't answered the very concrete question I posed to you:

"How do Herrnstein and Murray, if they do so at all, define 'black people' and 'white people'?"

Please do so.

And while you are at it.

Show me a person that fits your label "African descent". Also show me a person that fits your label "European descent", and lastly show me a person that fits your label "Asian descent".

Thank you.; Feb 6, 2009, 11:21:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: You haven't answered the very concrete question I posed to you: "How do Herrnstein and Murray, if they do so at all, define 'black people' and 'white people'?"

The answer is: I don't know.

Show me a person that fits your label "African descent". Also show me a person that fits your label "European descent", and lastly show me a person that fits your label "Asian descent".

I can do better than that, Fish. Take a cheek scraping from Hakeem Olajuwon, then a cheek scraping from Luke Walton, then a cheek scraping from Yao Ming.

Send all three samples to the DNA testing company that Prof. Skip Gates uses to trace people's family trees.

They'll tell you which one was of African descent, which one was of European descent and which one was of Asian descent.; Feb 6, 2009, 11:46:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"The answer is: I don't know."

That's because they don't define what a black or a white person actually is.

If one can not define the object of one's study, then such study is completely and utterly useless.
Why? Because there are no parameters.

That's why the Bell Curve is worthless and complete nonsense from the get go.

"I can do better than that, Fish. Take a cheek scraping from Hakeem Olajuwon, then a cheek scraping from Luke Walton, then a cheek scraping from Yao Ming.

Send all three samples to the DNA testing company that Prof. Skip Gates uses to trace people's family trees.

They'll tell you which one was of African descent, which one was of European descent and which one was of Asian descent."

No. actually they won't.

But that's not the issue here anyhow.

YOU are the one who postulated the sub-groups. "African descent", "Asian descent", and "European descent".
Do you know what biological characteristics determine a typical member of either of these sub-groups?; Feb 7, 2009, 12:29:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Well, Michael, you've persuaded me. Race is a fiction. "Black" and "white" are indefinable concepts when applied to human beings.

Now, doesn't that mean it cannot be reasonable -- let alone just -- to have a social policy like affirmative action that advantages "black" people on the basis of their "blackness"?; Feb 7, 2009, 12:38:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"Well, Michael, you've persuaded me. Race is a fiction."

Nope. Wrong again.

biological race is a fiction. Socio-political race is very real.

"Now, doesn't that mean it cannot be reasonable -- let alone just -- to have a social policy like affirmative action that advantages 'black' people on the basis of their 'blackness'?"

Nope. Because the categorizations of groups of persons into socio-political races has been and is being so done in order to damage them psychologically, politically, and economically. That damage needs to be repaired.; Feb 7, 2009, 1:11:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Because the categorizations of groups of persons into socio-political races has been and is being so done in order to damage them psychologically, politically, and economically.

And that is remedied by codifying socio-political race distinctions into public policy... how? Doesn't that make humans even more invested in their socio-politcal race label? AA intensifies the meaning of the label, it doesn't weaken it.

Dig what I'm saying? If it's the label itself that does the damage... we should be doing less labeling and not more, right?

Seems like common sense to me.

If biological race is a fiction, and socio-political race is socially and psychologically damaging, and affirmative action strengthens the concept of socio-political race... then you are morally bound, Michael, to oppose affirmative action.; Feb 7, 2009, 1:43:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 7, 2009, 3:07:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"Doesn't that make humans even more invested in their socio-politcal race label? AA intensifies the meaning of the label, it doesn't weaken it."

No. We are talking about repairing something that is damaged.

That is. Non-white people have been categorized as such without their consent. This forced categorization wasn't just done in order to sort people into different groups of persons designated by colors, but it was done in order to benefit one group such sorted ("whites") over another at the other group of persons such sorted's ("non-whites") expense.

Affirmative action is designed to compensate for this expense. That is, it is designed to make up for what has and what is being taken, what is missing.

Your line of thought is proceeding from the notion that nothing has been and is being taken from one group (non-whites) for the benefit of another group (whites) by that group (whites). If that were the case, then indeed affirmative action would be a device which would give non-whites a material incentive to hold on to the categorization "non-white". However, it is actually the other way around. The "affirmative action" which historically has been accorded to the group of persons categorized as "whites" is THE device which has been the incentive for that group of persons to invest themselves in their socio-political categorization "white".

"you are morally bound, Michael, to oppose affirmative action."

That's the whole point, Mills. I do oppose affirmative action. The only real form of affirmative action that exists: racism/white supremacy.

Racism/white supremacy is what accounts for the phenomenon that a person can be less qualified than another person, but nonetheless still get a job, a business deal, or an opportunity over another person who is more qualified, just because that less qualified person is categorized as "white".

That's affirmative action in pure. And it is not designed to compensate for what is missing/ is being taken.; Feb 7, 2009, 3:11:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey David,

Just as a bit of food for thought for you; I saw on tv once of a study someone did. They proved that, given a group of potential applicants, employers were much less likely to give call backs to equally qualified candidates with names like, say Tyrone or Keisha, than ones like John or Jennifer, even if they did not know their race. And there's really no other way to take this (that i'm aware of) than overt race (presumed race, that is) prejudice.

Essentially, this is saying that
in an otherwise level playing field, the advantage still goes to certain socially privileged groups. This, I think, is the sort of thing affirmative action is designed for. Basically, until we get right as a collective species, the law has to do it for us.; Feb 7, 2009, 6:55:00 AM
CNu said...: Commentary on racism is most incisive when it keeps its focus on the economic dimension -- which is central -- rather than the emotionalism about "hate" - wallowed in to excess by infotainment for the unthinking. (Mill's particular forte - "how can you hate your great benefactors?")

It is better to focus on the intent and the purposes of the racism, which are to create and maintain economic disparities.

From such focal points, one can advance policy and law enforcement arguments to eliminate these imbalances. Then, you are speaking about the here and now in a clear, unvarnished and rational manner. This can be extremely hard-hitting without being pitiful and cloying. (that "victim" spot where DV likes to position his personal anti-gay-joo bias)

Yes, there is White-on-Black racism (along with many other forms), but its root is not primarily simple emotional hatred, rather it is both fear (of two kinds: xenophobia and the historical guilt over slavery that Thomas Jefferson admitted to) and greed. The mania for control is driven by greed, and the essential fear is the anxiety over the loss of that control.

Ascribing White-on-Black racism to simple emotional hatred is the most comfortable overt explanation, as is clear from its prominence in the depictions of racism in popular culture (e.g., movies). The dominant culture finds it comforting to imagine that racism is confined to people with ungovernable hatreds and undisciplined minds. This relieves the majority who are comfortable with inequitable economic arrangements from any responsibility for the inevitable consequences of those arrangements; and even from any reproach in the eyes of recognized public opinion.

Racism is an instinctive tool to capture resources and deny them to competitor "species." (thus the importance of pseudo-scientific anti-Black propaganda tracts like the bell curve which specifically subserve this anti-Black "speciation" agenda)

Given its origin, history, and what it actually measures, only a complete moron could assign a genetic basis to IQ - but then - only a complete moron could be fooled into subverting his/her common sense into the "ethnies as species" ruse.; Feb 7, 2009, 9:14:00 AM
Anonymous said...: "I reject the established group identity myths of "black"" - The Blackest Man on the Internet :D

"in an "intelligence test" designed by people of Asian decent - Asians probably score pretty well." - but as noted, Asians outscore Whites on IQ tests designed by Whites. Just like Blacks outplay Whites in basketball, also designed by Whites.

And I think most of us know by now that race is more than just socio-political construct. Every race, by definition, is a genetic bell curve. Hence, you know it when you see it.

Or if anyone is HONESTLY confused what race Yao Ming or Shaq are, let me know.

And DV's curve...is still a bell curve. :); Feb 7, 2009, 9:55:00 AM
Anonymous said...: "Affirmative action is designed to compensate for this expense. That is, it is designed to make up for what has and what is being taken, what is missing."

U of C is now banning SAT scores in admissions to enroll more Blacks and Latinos - at the expense of higher-scoring Asians.

So, why do Asians score higher, even though many of their parents didn't even speak English well and affirmative action works against them? And why should spots be taken from them simply because they are not Black or Latino (but also still minorities)?

Does "diversity" really supercede quality and performance? How so?

Japan is practically 100% non-diverse and homogeneous - and they make the best products in the world! In fact, Germany does too. So, some might rightfully argue that a uniform majority is more important than too much diversity, if anything.

Especially when you look at highly-diverse Black/Latino areas like Brazil - which are full of favela shanty towns.

Isn't this policy against students with high IQs (but the wrong race) why our country has fallen behind and now has to outsource to...overseas Asians with higher IQs now?

Is "diversity" just another Commy Jewish meme used to destroy this country? That again, they fight STRONGLY against in their own country & culture?; Feb 7, 2009, 10:09:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Well, in intelligence tests designed by whites... Asians tend to score higher than whites. So what does that tell you..

It tells me that there is some generalization here that does not clearly explain the definition of "Whites" or "Asians" to validate the point.

Did some rural chicken farmer from West Virginia created the IQ test for some rural rice farmer in the Philippines to take and score better?

See the obvious flaw? Until the flaw is addressed, this entire Murrayism proposal is nothing but a repeat troll rant..; Feb 7, 2009, 10:16:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: We are talking about repairing something that is damaged.

And when will the repair work be finished and the damage healed, Fish?; Feb 7, 2009, 11:12:00 AM
Anonymous said...: "No. We are talking about repairing something that is damaged."

Why do you say damaged?

Is this based on a comparison with White K-gaming society or native Black r-gaming society?

Because if you are comparing the welfare of Black Americans to the former, they fall socioeconomically behind.

But if you compare it with native Africans, then Black Americans have been uplifted far above their native state (not getting damaged by) from living in a White K-zone. The K-tide lifts all ships in its harbor.

But if you expect to replicate the full results of White K-gaming culture, you're going to need more than public policy to do that. Which is also destroying said culture in the process. Societies always sink to their lowest common denominators. So, you could also say that heavy ships lower the tide...

Fact is, while the US is busy trying to get more diverse and give r-gamers K-results...Asia is working hard to simply get ahead with old-fashioned smarts and hard work.

Well, you reap what you sow. The US is already bankrupt and in debt - albeit diverse. While Asia has cash reserves and afloat - and could care less if they don't have a Black HNIC.; Feb 7, 2009, 11:23:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Japan is practically 100% non-diverse and homogeneous - and they make the best products in the world! In fact, Germany does too. So, some might rightfully argue that a uniform majority is more important than too much diversity, if anything.

Exactly! China is very similar, the Han Chinese run
everything and have no time for their minority groups.

People always say 'diversity is our greatest strength here' and they never give any evidence to back it up.; Feb 7, 2009, 11:49:00 AM
CNu said...: what a dumbass chorus...,

every single one of these paragons of collective intelligence is in the middle of a precipitous collapse that not a single one of them can forestall of remedy.

weak, feeble-minded, and pathetic "true believers" want to pretend that there's somebody else to blame besides the architects, managers, associates, and subordinates of these inherently flawed and inevitably doomed cultural constructs.

look in the mirror idiots...,; Feb 7, 2009, 12:18:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: Diversity is a meme used to market Group Identity.

There is no such thing as a "Gay person".

There is no such thing as an "African-American".

These terms were manufactured by social engineers playing God.; Feb 7, 2009, 12:18:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"And when will the repair work be finished and the damage healed, Fish?"

When white racism and the whole notion of the existence a socio-political race called "Whites" (which actually is the only existing socio-political race) is abolished in practice.; Feb 7, 2009, 12:30:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: When white racism and the whole notion of the existence a socio-political race called "Whites" (which actually is the only existing socio-political race) is abolished in practice.

And how can the existence of the socio-political race called "Whites" be abolished when social policies such as affirmative action define portions of the population as "non-white"?

Can't happen.

Therefore, affirmative action bolsters white supremacy by reinforcing the existence of the socio-political race called "Whites."; Feb 7, 2009, 12:37:00 PM
Anonymous said...: "When white racism and the whole notion of the existence a socio-political race called "Whites" (which actually is the only existing socio-political race) is abolished in practice."

I have a better solution. If Blacks want K-gaming results, then they need to play by K-gaming rules. At the very least as an intermediate stepping stone, affirmative action handouts should ONLY be granted to Black 2-parent FAMILIES. Single baby mamas (70%) should NOT be rewarded here.

This would be more a helping hand than an enabling handout.

Asia is reaping K-gaming results due to K-gaming values. Whereas America is reaping r-gaming results now due to our shift to r-gaming values. It's really that simple. You reap what you f'n sow. "Diversity" was just a Jewish memetic smokescreen to shift our evolutionary strategy from K to r...

Which has not only harmed the Black community, but our country as a whole.; Feb 7, 2009, 3:09:00 PM
G M said...: BTW Mike, how is the abolishment of "White racism" going to make 70% of Black daddies raise their kids?

Lol, methinks you misses the real problem here...; Feb 7, 2009, 3:10:00 PM
CNu said...: DV, your identity rap is deeply flawed in that it provides convenient memetic cover for racist morons like BBCB and turd-die. Not only is it wrong - inasmuch as it facilitates the mendacious propagandizing that these miscreants do - it's actually pernicious.

Understanding the economic warfare waged against Black folks in the 20th century and up through the present moment necessitates familiarity with decades of white affirmative action under the new deal and ever since, systematic discrimination against Black farmers, sustained systematic terrorism against Black folks, systematic employment discrimination, and of course, last but far, far, far from least - the active high-intensity war against Black men and full-employment for non-productive others under the so-called criminal justice system.

(keeping it focused on the economic dimension - I didn't even need to invoke the big obvious, of slavery and Jim Crow.); Feb 7, 2009, 3:56:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ Lancelot Link strikes again!

Who-da-fuck you expect to click through to all them links, CNu?

You can call names all you want. It does nothing to diminish the quality of my arguments.; Feb 7, 2009, 5:25:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Cnu - While racism does exist and has artificially skewed the stats in various directions over the years...it's still not enough to override the basic correlation between wealth, IQ & race.

Asians are probably the most K-gaming right now - with the highest IQs (outside of Ashkenazi Jews).

And lo and behold, DESPITE decades of systematic discrimination (both by Whites and through race-based affirmative action now), somehow they have still ended up with the highest average personal incomes in the US (again, with the exception of Jews)! Yes, actually higher than Whites...who "run" the system.

Now explain that, professor? If Blacks can't beat Whites cuz of "White racism," then how can Asians? Oops, there goes your excuses like a turd down the drain!

As you can see, the "system" here just naturally socioeconomically rewards K-gamers (intelligent, 2-parent family, slow breeders) before race - despite attempts to racially-rig it either way. Now, how can you expect to get the same results as White s or Asians when your IQ scores average much lower and 70% of your babies are born daddyless?

Is it even fair to expect that? Expecting equal results from unequal input/effort - is a delusional Commy wet dream, dude. Sorry, but until you address these deeper behaviors, nothing is really going to change. The answer is that simple and that difficult.

I submit that any Black family can easily achieve K-gaming results in this country if they adopt K-gaming lifestyle choices and given their natural IQ is sufficient. In fact, due to affirmative action, they have MORE than a fair shot as anybody else of other races. And if you can't make it here, you can't make it anywhere..; Feb 7, 2009, 7:46:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"And how can the existence of the socio-political race called "Whites" be abolished when social policies such as affirmative action define portions of the population as 'non-white'"?

You got it upside down again, Mills.

The existence of the category "non-whites" occurs solely because of the ongoing existence of the category "whites" and all of the affirmative action for "whites" that goes hand-in-glove with said categorization of a group of persons as "white".

Do away with affirmative action for "whites", you do away with the rationale for the socio-political category "white race". That instantly and automatically results in the abolition of the socio-political category "non-white" and any need for "non-white affirmative action".; Feb 7, 2009, 7:50:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: byrdeye...

"BTW Mike, how is the abolishment of "White racism" going to make 70% of Black daddies raise their kids?"

What "Black daddies"? As you well know those are actually lizards who transform into "black" humans when there's a full moon and their tin-lizzie space pods pop open in the corn fields.

(((shakin' head))); Feb 7, 2009, 7:55:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: CNulan said...

"DV, your identity rap is deeply flawed in that it provides convenient memetic cover for racist morons like BBCB and turd-die. Not only is it wrong - inasmuch as it facilitates the mendacious propagandizing that these miscreants do - it's actually pernicious."

CNu, I'm neither engaged in a contest with these gentlemen, nor do I view them as racists.

When the Official Holocaust story is challenged, the challenger is attacked and discredited. Simply asking a question is patently anti-Semitic.

When the Official Race assumptions about IQ and equality are challenged, you attack the challenger and characterize their challenge as patently racist.

I'd rather just hold another IQ Test.

Let's see who really is more intelligent.

Let's define intelligence.

Let's agree to a playing field.

I aint scared.

Why play Abe Foxman and attack the messenger?; Feb 7, 2009, 8:13:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: Blogger Michael Fisher said...

byrdeye...

"BTW Mike, how is the abolishment of "White racism" going to make 70% of Black daddies raise their kids?"

What's the matter Fisher, you scared of Byrdeye?

You can't answer that question?

Aight, aight. I'll get this for you.

Byrd, how does "Erectile dysfunction", "drug addiction" and the "general emasculation of 70% of white men" bode for the future of White Daddies?; Feb 7, 2009, 8:22:00 PM
CNu said...: CNu, I'm neither engaged in a contest with these gentlemen, nor do I view them as racists.

When the Official Holocaust story is challenged, the challenger is attacked and discredited. Simply asking a question is patently anti-Semitic.

You think I care what either one of these imbeciles thinks about your favorite whipping boy - da joos?

Hell, one thinks they're anal-probing aliens, and the other is more than delighted to bend over to receive his "reptilian" reach-around for a few $$$.

AFAIC - they'd each be cartoons - unworthy of comment - were it not for their pseudo-scientific, anti-Black propagandizing....,; Feb 8, 2009, 12:40:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ Dude... you know IQ measures something real. You know this.; Feb 8, 2009, 1:56:00 PM
CNu said...: How many IQ tests have you personally taken and exactly how well did you perform?

I'm curious to know because you evidence a certainty that could only be borne of deep and wide personal experience, right?

Surely it can't be that you simply read Murray and Herrnstein and were too stupid to see the obvious and widely publicized ways in which they pulled the wool over peoples eyes?; Feb 8, 2009, 2:28:00 PM
Submariner said...: David Mills, you're right that acid remarks don't assail the quality of your argument. But the tacit avoidance by you and Byrdeye to address the historical evidence provided by Craig Nulan and Michael Fisher effectively places you in intellectual limbo.

The irrefutable fact is that blacks in America made remarkable progress after the Civil War. (I'll leave in abeyance the antebellum era.) Read the memoirs of U.S. Grant. See the BookTV After Words interview with Philip Dray, author of Capitol Men. Until very recently, two parent households were the norm for black folks. Paul Robeson, despite a pristine academic career and graduating from law school alongside a future SCOTUS justice, couldn't be gainfully employed as a lawyer. So that shit about K and R games is wack.

From the Thirties to the Fifties Sal Mineo, James Cagney, Elvis Presley, and Marlon Brando were the portraits of delinquent youths and hard-boiled criminals. Read colonial American and Shakespearean English descriptions of the Irish.

During this past election cycle, even Barack Obama and his entrenched middle-class supporters were featured as the Giant Negro, a chimerical delusion of insecure white psychopaths. I spoke to nurses who told me straightfaced that their husbands were arming themselves and stockpiling their households for inevitable racial conflicts.

In the end, if you can't muster even ten minutes to scroll through some linkes, then it's doubtful that you'll ever make a sincere effort to examine Derek Bok's Shape of the River or Adam Fairclough's A Class of Their Own. You and Byrdeye will remain content to exist in an Aristotelian universe comprised of an intellectual silo.; Feb 8, 2009, 2:54:00 PM
CNu said...: wtf has Mills made an argument yet? (ever?)

In two years of looking for one, I have yet to see a single example from him.

fyi - during the 70's and 80's MIT was the absolute hub of the IQ controversy in America. I entered the cognitive science program that arose from that and from the electrical engineering department's emphasis on strong AI under Marvin Minsky in 1981 at its origin.

In 1984, I won the Thomas Marill scholarship in artificial intelligence. At that time and thanks to that program, I had an opportunity to meet all the players and hear them directly set forth their case(s) in tedious detail.

I absolutely wish one of these sad maternal fornicators WOULD attempt an argument for a change, but it's not going to happen - and at this point, I'd sooner see these racist cane toads culled from the herd as expend an iota of effort trying to show them the error of their ways.; Feb 8, 2009, 3:09:00 PM
CNu said...: Insurmountable Fact Number One:
Despite all that is presently known about the human genome, there are no known genes that contribute to normal inter-individual variation in cognition. Therefore, the proponents of IQ heritability are all compelled to refer to an unobservable that they contend manifests itself in the culture-neutral cognitive "phenotype".

This is magical thinking at its purest. However, given the value-laden history of race and IQ in America, something quite a bit more pernicious than simple ignorance and stupidity is at the root of this bit of magical thinking.; Feb 8, 2009, 3:19:00 PM
CNu said...: Insurmountable Fact Number Two:
At present, there exist no psychological tests to measure intellectual potential independent of specific experience provided by sociocultural and economic circumstance. The very notion of culture-free "intelligence" is challenging to define.

The reason I asked Mills how many IQ tests he's taken and what his results were, is that based on his own experience, I'd like to see him posit a culture-free measure of intelligence and construct an argument on that basis.

The best he's endeavored here-to-date is to ramble incompetently about selective breeding and the performance of rats in mazes...., unfortunately he could neither pinpoint the phenotypic characteristic accounting for variable performance of rats in mazes, or, show that his unspecified phenotypic trait was heritable.

That's a pretty weak foundation for the value-laden ideological sewage to which he subscribes, but then, when have racists EVER distinguished themselves as exemplars of fact, or reason?; Feb 8, 2009, 3:34:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Nulan...

"when have racists..."

Well, I'm glad someone finally called Overcoverpassingaswhiteboy by his name.; Feb 8, 2009, 5:48:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: How much money would I lose if I were to wager that Messrs. Nulan and Fisher are, as we speak, having their children educated in schools with majority-white student bodies?; Feb 8, 2009, 7:19:00 PM
CNu said...: How much can you afford to lose?; Feb 8, 2009, 8:07:00 PM
CNu said...: I'd rather just hold another IQ Test.

Let's see who really is more intelligent.

Let's define intelligence.

Let's agree to a playing field.

I aint scared.

Why play Abe Foxman and attack the messenger?

THIS IS SPARTA!!!!!!

Those two pitiful, arrogant little persians done already been kicked down the big-A killin hole...,; Feb 8, 2009, 8:12:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: The very notion of culture-free "intelligence" is challenging to define.

The notion of "culture-free" intelligence is also useless, Craig. Fuck challenging.

Attempts to measure intelligence don't spring from the same impulse as to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Attempts to measure intelligence reflect the fact that high intelligence is required to perform certain functions within this culture.

Such functions tend to be highly rewarded by the culture, with money or prestige or both: Medical doctors, lawyers, bankers, engineers, college professors, legislators, corporate executives, architects, airline pilots, etc. (Capt. "Sully" Sullenberger qualified for Mensa at the age of 12.)

You imply, Craig, that there's something dubious about measuring the types of "intelligence" that are valued in the particular culture wherein we live.

But IQ has always been designed to be a cultural measurement. That is its value.

Indeed, the meaning of the entire discussion we're having is: Why are black people less successful and prosperous than whites and Asians in this culture?

So it would be folly to even try to design a "culture-free" IQ test. What would be the fucking point?; Feb 8, 2009, 8:14:00 PM
CNu said...: Memory is useless?

You're a moron David.

The more you say, the further you diminish yourself.

So please, please continue....,; Feb 8, 2009, 8:44:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Memory is useless?

The fuck are you pratting on about now, Craig?

Why not bring up the "physical intelligence" displayed by Michael Jordan and Dr. J?

I'm talking about the kind of intelligence that matters... the kind that results in world-class universities, state-of-the-art hospitals, entrepreneurship, the harnessing of electricity, the eradication of smallpox, etc.; Feb 8, 2009, 8:52:00 PM
CNu said...: Murray and Herrnstein explicity argue that IQ is 40-80% heritable.

That means it's a phenotypic trait slug, and thus, inherently culture-free.

If you can't objectively define or measure this alleged phenotypic trait, and, you can't identify a single gene implicated in cognition - on what basis do you predicate the claim of heritability?

You made the same ignorant-assed genetic argument to me in 2007 idiot.

Are you now trying to back away from what you've previously stated?; Feb 8, 2009, 8:52:00 PM
CNu said...: memory is an objective and measurable cognitive trait which happens to have been in the news in the past week because there appears to be a distinct neurocytotechtonic anomaly associated with those rare individuals possessing eidetic memory - you simple-assed clown.; Feb 8, 2009, 8:59:00 PM
CNu said...: But IQ has always been designed to be a cultural measurement. That is its value.

I've gotta hand it to you David, you are easily the oiliest and most dishonest scumbag I've ever had the pleasure of dissecting on the web.; Feb 8, 2009, 9:03:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Murray and Herrnstein explicity argue that IQ is 40-80% heritable.

I am not arguing Murray and Herrnstein's case. I am arguing my own. Which has nothing to do with quantifying the heritability of IQ.

Are you now trying to back away from what you've previously stated?

Wipe the spittle from your lips, breathe deeply, and focus, Craig.

"IQ" is a cultural measurement of cognitive capabilities. Cognitive capabilities unto themselves may or may not be genetically linked. I think they may be.

And I think that, now that the human genome has been mapped, the question will be decisively resolved, one way or the other, within our lifetimes.; Feb 8, 2009, 9:05:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: memory is an objective and measurable cognitive trait... you simple-assed clown.

And how do you suppose the psychometric testing of this "trait" would be predictive of academic success?; Feb 8, 2009, 9:14:00 PM
CNu said...: IQ is a measure of curricular assimilation.

Misused by devious trash like you and turd-die for a bit more than a century now, it's been morphed into a pseudo-scientific justification for racist tendencies.

Speaking of which, there will sooner be a genetic test for racist proclivities. At least in that case, the "ethnies as species" error is reasonably well-defined and testably present or absent in individuals.; Feb 8, 2009, 9:18:00 PM
CNu said...: And how do you suppose the psychometric testing of this "trait" would be predictive of academic success?

David Mills is a fundamentalist retard. I use the word "fundamentalist" in the sense that despite all evidence to the contrary, he is demonstrably incapable of seriously entertaining the possibility that he is wrong about his basic beliefs.

While the term fundamentalist applies pretty obviously to Biblical literalists and their ilk, it's not limited to them. It even applies to the likes of Richard Dawkins, though he has publicly stated that he would be willing to change his mind on the subject of God. All it would take, he says, is "evidence".

When you come up with a specific trait measured by IQ testing, and show me a genetic correlate to this single objectively defined cognitive trait - hollar.

Until then, p.h.u.k.y.o.u..,; Feb 8, 2009, 9:32:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ All the name-calling, Craig... it reflects not only on your intellect but on your home training.; Feb 8, 2009, 9:35:00 PM
CNu said...: David, do you ever wonder if your exceedingly poor moral hygiene is somehow expressed in the fact that you're a petri dish for colo-rectal polyps and other cancerous lesions?; Feb 8, 2009, 9:46:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: Something else on the subject of "memory." (And Lord knows why Craig thought it clever to toss that pickled herring into the pot.)

As I advance through my 40s, I notice that my memory isn't what it used to be. But no one would suggest that I'm "less intelligent" than I was in my 20s, on the basis of memory glitches.; Feb 8, 2009, 9:50:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: David, do you ever wonder if your exceedingly poor moral hygiene is somehow expressed in the fact that you're a petri dish for colo-rectal polyps and other cancerous lesions?

Craig, I certainly hope that, now that you're pushing 50, you've had a colonoscopy. Forewarned is forearmed.

(And I bet your rectum is no stranger to "forearms."); Feb 8, 2009, 9:55:00 PM
CNu said...: is it that your polemics have the taint of putrefaction, or, is that foul rhetorical stench a symptom of your putrifying taint?; Feb 8, 2009, 10:28:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"How much money would I lose if I were to wager that Messrs. Nulan and Fisher are, as we speak, having their children educated in schools with majority-white student bodies?"

How much do you care to wager in my case, Mills?; Feb 8, 2009, 10:34:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 8, 2009, 10:34:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"I'm talking about the kind of intelligence that matters... the kind that results in world-class universities, state-of-the-art hospitals, entrepreneurship, the harnessing of electricity, the eradication of smallpox, etc."

Have you, David, created a world-class university, a state-of-the-art hospital, a successful and profitable entrepreneurial company, harnessed electricity, or eradicated smallpox?

I'm not asking this question to be facetious. I'm very serious about it. So have you done any or all of these things?; Feb 8, 2009, 10:42:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ No.; Feb 8, 2009, 10:58:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ... is that foul rhetorical stench a symptom of your putrifying taint?

Cancer ain't no joke, Craig. Get yourself checked.; Feb 8, 2009, 11:00:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"^ No."

Does that mean that your mental intelligence is somehow deficient?; Feb 8, 2009, 11:16:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ No, Michael, as my list was incomplete in the interest of brevity.

High intelligence also informs elite-level journalism and fictional storytelling.; Feb 8, 2009, 11:28:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"High intelligence also informs elite-level journalism and fictional storytelling."

Assuming that what you produce is considered elite-level journalism and fictional story telling, does this mean that you consider yourself highly intelligent?

And if so, did you inherit this high level of intelligence?; Feb 8, 2009, 11:52:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ... does this mean that you consider yourself highly intelligent?

^ I consider myself to be of high verbal intelligence. I have no way of knowing for sure to what degree this was inherited.; Feb 9, 2009, 12:01:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ And Nulan might be way ahead of me in the all-important "memory" trait.

**eyeroll**; Feb 9, 2009, 12:09:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"I have no way of knowing for sure to what degree this was inherited."

If you can not know for sure to what degree your high verbal intelligence was inherited, then ho can you be sure to what degree world-class university creating intelligence, state-of-the-art hospital creating intelligence, a successful and profitable entrepreneurial company creating intelligence, harnessing electricity harnessing intelligence, or smallpox eradicating intelligence is inherited?; Feb 9, 2009, 12:19:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ I never said I was sure, Mike. I said I think it may be the case... and that genomic research will probably settle the question, one way or the other, in our lifetimes.; Feb 9, 2009, 12:45:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"I never said I was sure, Mike. I said I think it may be the case..."

Well, since you acknowledged that you have no evidence for the inheritability of the degree of an individual's intelligence, and furthermore acknowledged that there is no such thing as a biological "race" of persons and you therefore with certainty can not correlate the inherited degree of intelligence with "race", and have no way of correlating the inherited degree of intelligence with an individual's progenitor...

Given all that, don't you think it ought to behoove you to abandon your quest to find inherent biological reasons for the successes or failures of "black" and "white" or other groupings and look to the socio-political arrangements as an explanation of the same?; Feb 9, 2009, 2:01:00 AM
CNu said...: bears repeating;

David Mills is a fundamentalist retard. I use the word "fundamentalist" in the sense that despite all evidence to the contrary, he is demonstrably incapable of seriously entertaining the possibility that he is wrong about his basic beliefs.; Feb 9, 2009, 7:00:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: ... since you acknowledged that you have no evidence for the inheritability of the degree of an individual's intelligence... don't you think it ought to behoove you to abandon your quest to find inherent biological reasons for the successes or failures of "black" and "white" or other groupings...?

That doesn't follow at all, Michael.

I have no way of ascertaining the degree to which my intelligence was inherited, but I believe it was inherited to some degree, as my father was also verbally facile, though having only a high-school education.

What follows from this, logically, is that I support those researchers who are studying the connection between genes and intelligence... and I don't seek to shut them down in a politically correct witch hunt, or to marginalize them with labels like "racist" and "pseudoscience."

That's what intelligent people do when they lack sufficient evidence to resolve a question conclusively. They acquire more evidence.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:56:00 AM
CNu said...: Nah. It's what racist scum intent on rationalizing elite rule have done for generations. Has nothing to do with "intelligence", has everything to do with poor moral hygiene and a long recognized sickness of faith.

This irrational impetus is ancient, has never required a shred of evidence, and won't end until those who benefit from its perpetuation are extinct.; Feb 9, 2009, 9:18:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"That doesn't follow at all, Michael."

The way you quoted what I stated it certainly doesn't. But that's not what I said. Your quote eviscerated the key notion put forward in my paragraph namely this:

"and furthermore acknowledged that there is no such thing as a biological 'race' of persons and you therefore with certainty can not correlate the inherited degree of intelligence with 'race',"

upon which the question is premised: "Given all that, don't you think it ought to behoove you to abandon your quest to find inherent biological reasons for the successes or failures of "black" and "white" or other groupings and look to the socio-political arrangements as an explanation of the same?"

I'll chalk this up to an honest mistake rather than a deliberate distortion on your part (or a lack of inherited intelligence?) and would ask you to answer the question considering the correct premise.

Thank you; Feb 9, 2009, 10:49:00 AM
CNu said...: I'll chalk this up to an honest mistake rather than a deliberate distortion on your part (or a lack of inherited intelligence?)

good luck with that...,; Feb 9, 2009, 11:03:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: "... and furthermore acknowledged that there is no such thing as a biological 'race' of persons and you therefore with certainty can not correlate the inherited degree of intelligence with 'race',"

Are you referring to my joke upthread where I said you'd convinced me that race was a fiction?

Mike, for God's sake, that was sarcasm.; Feb 9, 2009, 11:14:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"Mike, for God's sake, that was sarcasm."

In that case I gotta go with "deliberate distortion" AND "lack of intelligence (inherited or otherwise)".

Why?

You can't provide proof for the existence of "biological race"

You can't provide proof for the existence of the in inheritability of degree of intelligence in general.

You can't provide proof for the existence of the in inheritability of degree of intelligence in your own person.

You cite the Bell Curve and don't know if or how the author defined race, that being the object of their study.

In the absence of empirical proof you make all kinds of socio-political pronouncements about race.

I sincerely was hoping against all hope that Nulan's invective was misplaced.

I guess not.; Feb 9, 2009, 1:48:00 PM
Intellectual Insurgent said...: This is some of the best reading on the internet.

It appears that Mills is forcing facts to fit his conclusions, leading to an unending merry-go-round of circular reasoning.

The premise he puts forth is essentially that you know who is "intelligent" because they have specific careers and those careers (lawyers, doctors, etc.) require intelligence. And because the careers require intelligence, they are handsomely rewarded financially.

This leads to the distorted and rather silly conclusion that wealth = intelligence and that one's career = intelligence.

One need only spend a little time in a choice pool hall to witness the silliness of these assertions. In them, you will see high school graduates hustle doctors and lawyers out of thousands of dollars in games of one-pocket and 9-ball. The best pool players - usually Filipinos - can tell you all about psychology, geometry, physics and metereology within 10 seconds of stepping to the pool table.

And they don't pay taxes. Who are the smart ones?; Feb 9, 2009, 2:53:00 PM
Anonymous said...: One need only spend a little time in a choice pool hall to witness the silliness of these assertions. In them, you will see high school graduates hustle doctors and lawyers out of thousands of dollars in games of one-pocket and 9-ball. The best pool players - usually Filipinos - can tell you all about psychology, geometry, physics and metereology within 10 seconds of stepping to the pool table.

And they don't pay taxes. Who are the smart ones?

nice!; Feb 9, 2009, 3:10:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: The premise he puts forth is essentially that you know who is "intelligent" because they have specific careers and those careers (lawyers, doctors, etc.) require intelligence. And because the careers require intelligence, they are handsomely rewarded financially.

Intellectual insurgent, how did you fuck up all that good sense I was making?

Think it through; it's really very simple. Society has an interest in identifying individuals with "high intelligence"... because our culture has a number of important jobs requiring "high intelligence."

That those jobs tend to be well-compensated explains why Jews and Chinese Americans are more prosperous on average than blacks and Native Americans.

If intelligence correlates with genetics, then this "inequality" of income distribution is not unjust. It just means the most valuable workers are reaping the most benefits.

This is why the so-called "black partisans" are hoping like fuck that a genetic link to intelligence isn't established.

Because "justice" would not demand "equal outcomes." Indeed, justice would demand unequal outcomes.; Feb 9, 2009, 5:59:00 PM
CNu said...: Black partisans need only refer to the existing facts and evidence in full confidence. It's racist scumbags intent on maintaining socio-politically established economic inequality who are desperate to advance their unscrupulous polemics by any means necessary.; Feb 9, 2009, 6:15:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"If intelligence correlates with genetics, then this "inequality" of income distribution is not unjust. It just means the most valuable workers are reaping the most benefits."

Mills is basically saying here that "blacks" got to be slaves and "whites" got to be masters because that is the natural biological order of things. A just order at that.

What Mills' example demonstrates above all is that that "passing" as white requires the denigration and abuse of "black" people.

Apparently Mills is quite aware of that. Which puts his "journalistic" specialization of "exposing" "black radicals" such as Sister Souljah, Pof. Griff and Public Enemy in the appropriate motivational context.

Mills' particular utility to white racists is his claim to be "black" of some sort.

Keep on kissing "white" folks asses, Mills. Maybe you gonna get a few more crumbs off David Simon's well-laden table.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:01:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: ^ Keep the ad hominems coming, Yalie. I'll continue to speak my mind... with even more sureness about the weakness of my opponents.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:08:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"Keep the ad hominems coming, Yalie. I'll continue to speak my mind... with even more sureness about the weakness of my opponents."

That's not "ad hominems", David "Member-Of-The-Verbal-Intelligence-Elite" Mills. The correct plural is "ad hominae".

Further, Mr. David "Member-Of-The-Verbal-Intelligence-Elite" Mills. It would behoove you as an elite intelligent wordsmith to use "ad hominem" correctly.

Those aren't ad hominae, Mills. They are statements of fact.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:28:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:54:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: The correct plural is "ad hominae".

See what happens when you try and get all cute, Fish?

"Ad hominae" is NOT the correct plural of "ad hominem." Ad hominem means "to the man"; ad hominae means "to the men."

"Ad hominem" is not a noun in the first place, but I had presumed we were speaking colloquially, and that no one would waste time objecting to my colloquial pluralization "ad hominems."

Had you really known a damn thing about English usage, Fish, you would've instructed me to employ this correct phrase: "Keep the arguments ad hominem coming."

I only wish you were capable of embarrassment.; Feb 9, 2009, 8:56:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"'Ad hominae' is NOT the correct plural of 'ad hominem.' Ad hominem means 'to the man'; ad hominae means 'to the men.'"

David "Member-Of-The-Verbal-Intelligence-Elite" Mills. Your the one who used "ad hominem" incorrectly pluralizing the phrase as a noun. The only way that the word "Hominem", though it be in acusative form, can be pluralized is as "hominae". In the "colloquial" (i.e. as a newly invented dialect) sense as you are trying to pluralize it, there is no (s) at the end. It would just plainly be "Keep the ad hominem coming".

Go learn a bit of Latin.; Feb 9, 2009, 9:19:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: That's "You're" by the way. But then again I have no claim to being a member of the verbal intelligence elite.; Feb 9, 2009, 9:21:00 PM
Intellectual Insurgent said...: Society has an interest in identifying individuals with "high intelligence"... because our culture has a number of important jobs requiring "high intelligence."

Lawyering and medicine do not require high intelligence. They require big egos and the ability to memorize a lot of nonsense. Intelligence, however, isn't a prerequisite to entrance.

Engineering requires far more "intelligence" and they are woefully undercompensated in comparison.

That those jobs tend to be well-compensated explains why Jews and Chinese Americans are more prosperous on average than blacks and Native Americans.

Hmmm... I don't know what "well-compensated" means, but working 100 hours a week at a law firm or a hospital to collect $165K per year isn't all that when you work it out hourly. Also, that lawyer or doctor is more likely to be divorced or never married or childless, so it's hard to call them successful.

How successful can one be if he never propagates his seed?

Perhaps it's time to rethink your notions of "compensation".

In any event, prosperity has more to do with frugality than with your job. There are lots of broke doctors and lawyers out there, one check away from the employment line. Then you hear the story of the seamstress who dies and leaves a million dollars to her kids. A friend of mine - who is Black - had it happen to her. Dad passed away and, much to everyone's surprise, the blue collar fellow left his kids a couple million.

My dad is a CPA. I spent one tax season preparing tax returns with him and got an excellent education on true "prosperity" and paper "prosperity". There are some Mexican gardners out there doing a hell of a lot better than the "educated" lawyer down the block.

Open your eyes. Someone who gets paid $150K per year, but has $160K in debts, including their mortgage, private schools for the kids, car payments for hubby and wife, vacations they take to brag that they took them, ain't prosperous. He is insolvent.; Feb 9, 2009, 10:33:00 PM
Undercover Black Man said...: But then again I have no claim to being a member of the verbal intelligence elite.

You're goddamn right you don't.; Feb 10, 2009, 1:27:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Lawyering and medicine do not require high intelligence.

Ummmm... WHAT?

Open your eyes. Someone who gets paid $150K per year, but has $160K in debts, including their mortgage, private schools for the kids, car payments for hubby and wife, vacations they take to brag that they took them, ain't prosperous. He is insolvent.

Wow. Thank goodness there aren't more black doctors and lawyers, huh?; Feb 10, 2009, 1:33:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"I only wish you were capable of embarrassment."

Moi?

LOL

Here's you who says he's black and runs around telling the world that his very own black relatives are intellectually inferior by nature.

And you seriously have no idea how pathetic that is?

Do you know how you look to these white people whom you wanna please so much?

Like a real live Lincoln Perry. Only he played at Stepin Fetchit. You actually live Stepin Fetchit.

There's not a "white" person, "Asian" person, "Jewish" person, in the world that would announce to all that care to hear that they come from inferior idiot stock such as you do.

And you call that "intelligence"?

(((shakin' head}}}; Feb 10, 2009, 2:36:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Do you know how you look to these white people whom you wanna please so much?

White people read this blog?; Feb 10, 2009, 2:42:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: There's not a "white" person, "Asian" person, "Jewish" person, in the world that would announce to all that care to hear that they come from inferior idiot stock such as you do.

You should read what some Nigerians be writing... in Nigerian newspapers! Ta-DOW.; Feb 10, 2009, 3:16:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 10, 2009, 4:44:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; Feb 10, 2009, 4:46:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"You should read what some Nigerians be writing... in Nigerian newspapers! Ta-DOW."

I didn't know that according to you "Nigerian" falls under "white person", "Asian" person, or Jewish person.

Note that I didn't include "black person" in my enumeration. That's cause there are legions of shufflin' Negroes who, like you, wanna blame their own stupidity on their relatives' genes.

Thus once again you demonstrate your particular degree of "verbal intelligence".

Mills. Face it. You ain't exactly the brightest candle. In fact, that flamelet, if ever lit, went out long ago. Somebody done pissed on your wick early on in life.

Pathetic...; Feb 10, 2009, 4:47:00 AM
Denmark Vesey said...: "Hmmm... I don't know what "well-compensated" means, but working 100 hours a week at a law firm or a hospital to collect $165K per year isn't all that when you work it out hourly. Also, that lawyer or doctor is more likely to be divorced or never married or childless, so it's hard to call them successful." Insurgent

Hell of a point; Feb 10, 2009, 7:44:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Mills. Face it. You ain't exactly the brightest candle. In fact, that flamelet, if ever lit, went out long ago.

Then why-da-fonk did you approach me about collaborating on a screenplay with you, Michael? Why reach out to me to breathe life into your bullshit idea?

After kicking it around for a couple of phone calls, I realized I wouldn't enjoy working with you. You're just too difficult a personality. Remember, Fish?

And what did you do when I went my separate way? If I remember right... you begged.

Now that was some pathetic shit.; Feb 10, 2009, 8:54:00 AM
CNu said...: As per our discussion DV...,

is it even possible to imagine a better illustration of why there is no such thing as a Black venture capital firm?; Feb 10, 2009, 9:18:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: ... why there is no such thing as a Black venture capital firm?

It's no surprise to me.; Feb 10, 2009, 9:26:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"And what did you do when I went my separate way? If I remember right... you begged."

Scuse me?

What planet exactly are you living on?; Feb 10, 2009, 11:09:00 AM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"... why there is no such thing as a Black venture capital firm?

It's no surprise to me."

You must be living in your very own private hell. Convinced that black folks are stupid by nature you, who apparently thinks that he is black, must suspect that that stupidity is ingrained within yourself. Which explains why you apparently love white so much. You must literally hope that your "white" genes are so overpoweringly a fountain of intelligence that they knock your black stupidity genes out.

Problem is, Mills. You can say and do whatever you like. You ain't never gonna be "biologically white" or "biologically Jewish" for that matter. To "white" people you are always gonna be and gonna remain a Nigger (or a Shvarze).

White people don't respect sycophants. If at all, they use them, and they certainly giggle about them.

Like I said, pathetic.; Feb 10, 2009, 11:59:00 AM
Undercover Black Man said...: Scuse me? What planet exactly are you living on?

Hee-hee... How much shit-talk were you expecting to get away with before I hung your ass on the laundry line, Fisher?; Feb 10, 2009, 2:03:00 PM
Michael Fisher said...: Mills...

"Hee-hee... How much shit-talk were you expecting to get away with before I hung your ass on the laundry line, Fisher?"

Mills. Even if it were true that I begged you for anything, that doesn't change one iota of fact about you and your pathetic spittle licking self-denigration.

Now, practicing pathetic spittle licking is your own private matter. What is offensive about the whole thing is that you seek to drag the rest of black folks into your anus-rimming world.

I hate to agree with Nulan on anything. But damn, he sure was right about you.; Feb 10, 2009, 3:47:00 PM