Some of you may have noticed that Lord Hillyer and Prince_James have both been banned for 3 days. Here is some information, which I hope will also act as a warning against similar behaviour by other sciforums members in future.

How the ban occurred:

Lord Hillyer started a thread seeking to form a "club" of white supremacists on sciforums. Membership of this "club" was explicitly to be restricted to members of sciforums identifying themselves as "white".

Prince_James and a few of the other usual suspects immediately jumped on the band wagon to form this racist posse with Hillyer.

The thread was almost immediately moved to the Cesspool by an adminstrator. Prince_James then started a new thread complaining about this move and demanding that the original thread be moved out of the Cesspool.

This was when I happened to log into the forum. I immediately deleted both threads. I hoped that this would be a signal that these threads were objectionable and would not be tolerated on sciforums. This message went unheeded, as Prince_James immediately started another thread to complain about the deletions. I deleted that thread as well. Hillyer then started a new thread to start the same "club" under a different name.

At this point, I banned both of them. Since this is a first offence, the ban period is the usual 3 days.

sciforums policy on separatism

Here is the take-away message of this thread:

sciforums administrators and moderators are very tolerant of discussions of controversial issues, including the matter of race. Discussions of race and various associated matters have been quite common - some would say popular - among certain members of sciforums in recent times, and vigorous debates have been had. In general, such discussions have not been moderated.

The present instance is a completely different scenario. Here, we have two members of sciforums essentially seeking to split the sciforums community into "us" and "them" groups, divided along racist lines.

Such an action is contrary to the spirit of sciforums and will not be tolerated in any form. In this instance, the attempt to incite hatred among members was along lines of race, but we would equally look down upon any similar attempt along the lines of gender, religious belief, nationality and so on.

sciforums is a forum for intelligent discussion. As such, it promotes debate among members in an environment of mutual respect for diversity and the understanding that people do not always agree.

sciforums is not an enclave for separatists who are unwilling to engage with their fellow human beings. It will never be that.

Anybody who prefers such divisions should leave now and find an alternative forum which will suit them better. Many such forums exist.

But what about "free speech"?

Racists, sexists, religious bigots and the like can practice their free speech on the other available internet forums. Good luck to you.

Wow. All that happened right under my nose and I didn't know it. None should complain. A 3 day ban? That's a swat with a tissue. For what it's worth I think you did the right thing, though I think they should be permanently banned.

Didn't Prince_James once complain about clubs for minority races which didn't like to host whites, whining about how whites are treated so badly? And now he's trying to get involved with a whites-only, white-supremacist club?

Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists.

people that whine about "free speech" on privately funded sites always cracked me up.

Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists.

No.

"Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists" on the internet.

I have to wonder at just how they would have ensured their members would have been white only.:rolleyes:

Imagine the paranoia. If a 'member' started sounding coloured.. You could just imagine the PM's...

'Pssst... I think we have been infiltrated'...

No.

"Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists" on the internet.

I have to wonder at just how they would have ensured their members would have been white only.:rolleyes:

"On the Internet" is optional. :p

This all stemmed from the "Black Policemans Association (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=63902)" thread. They repeatedly implied that white people could not join (they summised that from the title of the association) although its not clear if whites are banned from joining - I mean the UK BPA was founded by the then Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Sir Paul Condon - and he's white.

As far as I know there isn't a "Black Association of Sciformers" so why did they wanted to set up a white one?

Lord Hillyer started a thread seeking to form a "club" of white supremacists on sciforums.

yeah, i seen that thread. i'm glad i didn't post in it!

I immediately gave an infraction for that thread.

I can't believe they were so foolish to think they would get away with it. Obviously they thought it was funny, then irked that James R was dissociating them from SciF. And we mustn't overlook the fine point that Pinch James has a (supposed) philosophical ambition where the practice of such reason is a disgrace—imagine philosophy under his tutelage! I agree with Genji; three days is a tap on the wrist. Segregate them.

I'm surprised at my friend Lord Hillyer. Looks like I'll have to update the Cuckoo List (http://www.sciforums.com/encyclopedia/Category:Cuckoo%21_Cuckoo%21).

i want on the cuckoo list as well...what do i need to do to get myself included?

i want on the cuckoo list as well...what do i need to do to get myself included?

Done, TDI;)

Here are a few ideas:

1. Start an internet-based racial separatist movement.
2. Deny the Holocaust, the existence of the AIDS virus or some other well-established fact.
3. Be old and grouchy.
4. Defend to the hilt America's sordid involvement in the Middle East.

Go for it!

Removed. He has to earn it.

hmmm....im gonna hit when you wankers arent expecting it.
thanks sam!

redarmy11...you make me sad.

James, but would you have acted the same if that was a thread with 'black' instead of 'white'?

James, but would you have acted the same if that was a thread with 'black' instead of 'white'?

im guessing he would...james is fairly stable.

redarmy11...you make me sad.
But why is that, my waffle-loving friend?

But why is that, my waffle-loving friend?

you removed me from the crazy page.

its fine...ill earn it. keep your eyes peeled.

The very best of luck to you, my sprout-eating chum.

The very best of luck to you, my sprout-eating chum.

im gonna shit in your cereal.

Chocolate Coco-Pops. http://www.sciforums.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

I posted bestiality, in a serious attempt to be banned.... these guys get it for starting up the kkk jr squad.

I posted bestiality, in a serious attempt to be banned.... these guys get it for starting up the kkk jr squad.

Since James banned them maybe when they come back they wont be white anymore.

James R.:

You are a coward, a liar, and an abuser of your position and power.

You are an anti-reason, anti-white, bigotted despot.

And frankly, you sicken me.

Moreover, you are slandering my name. I am not a white supremascist. I will have you prove your statement or I will have you take it back. I will not accept your libellous writings against me.

This was when I happened to log into the forum. I immediately deleted both threads. I hoped that this would be a signal that these threads were objectionable and would not be tolerated on sciforums. This message went unheeded, as Prince_James immediately started another thread to complain about the deletions. I deleted that thread as well. Hillyer then started a new thread to start the same "club" under a different name.

This is bullshit and you know it, James R.

You know full well that your deletion served no message whatsoever. In fact, it served only as further example of your flagrant abuse of power. You delete that which you cannot handle and use it was an excuse to ban. You provided neither warning nor rationale for your actions and indeed, it is transparent that you hid your actions through these cowardly actions in order that you did not have to handle it.

The present instance is a completely different scenario. Here, we have two members of sciforums essentially seeking to split the sciforums community into "us" and "them" groups, divided along racist lines.

Racist lines? No. Rase-based lines. We decided to form an informal group based on ancestry.

Such an action is contrary to the spirit of sciforums and will not be tolerated in any form. In this instance, the attempt to incite hatred among members was along lines of race, but we would equally look down upon any similar attempt along the lines of gender, religious belief, nationality and so on.

May your tongue fall out and your teeth rot, James R., for these further lies.

There was no incitement of hatred whatsoever. We never called:

1. Any race inferior.

2. That one should not be proud of being another race.

3. That anyone was a racial epithet.

Or any other hateful message.

Apparently we are banned for celebrating our ancestry.

You are an anti-white racist, James R.

He's back. And this time it's personal.

P.S. Is there some subtle difference between 'racist' and 'race-based' that escapes me?

Redarmy11:

Yes. Racist implies hate (as it is the general meaning of the term) whereas race-based is a neutral term that focuses on a biological factor relating back to phenotype and ancestry. We created an informal club meant for members who satisfied such ancestry and such genetics. We never said this group was superior, anymore than making a chess club implies that chess is superior to checkers.

And yes, it is personal: James R. is slandering me at this point. I will not tolerate this.

Prince_James:

This is precisely the reaction I expected from you. I hoped for better, but obviously it was not to be.

You delete that which you cannot handle and use it was an excuse to ban.

If it had been as innocent as you're now claiming, there would have been nothing that required "handling". Your own words betray you.

Racist lines? No. Rase-based lines. We decided to form an informal group based on ancestry.

Hoisted on your own petard, again.

Apparently we are banned for celebrating our ancestry.

I explained exactly why you were banned in the first post of this thread. Please read it again if it hasn't sunk in.

You're an intelligent guy. Think carefully as you contemplate where you want to take this from here. At this stage, I don't require an apology from you. You can have your white pride.

lol...I played like I was black there....


how all the slaves fought and Martin Luther King...hehehe....


another plot unveiled.

You can have your white pride.

I cannot believe those words came from you James, I am disappointed in you.:bawl:

I cannot believe those words came from you James, I am disappointed in you.:bawl:

This life is all but disappointment.

Bizarre.

*shakes head*

Redarmy11:

Yes. Racist implies hate (as it is the general meaning of the term) whereas race-based is a neutral term that focuses on a biological factor relating back to phenotype and ancestry. We created an informal club meant for members who satisfied such ancestry and such genetics. We never said this group was superior, anymore than making a chess club implies that chess is superior to checkers.

And yes, it is personal: James R. is slandering me at this point. I will not tolerate this.

:rolleyes:

Let me get this straight.

You and Hillyer begin a movement to form a segregated club in these forums, a forum which does not belong to you by the way, where only white members would be allowed to join. You get a 3 day ban (which is quite light if you ask me) and you are complaining?

You claim you are not a white supremacists, yet I can point to many of your posts where you claim that your colour makes you superior to anyone of colour. Hmmmm... I won't bother to point out the bleeding obvious at this point.

Bleating that you were banned for celebrating your ancestry is basically a crock. You were attempting to form a private club, in a forum that does not belong to you. Said club would only be open to certain members who were part of a certain race and colour. And you dare hide behind pride of your ancestry as an excuse? So to be proud of your ancestry, you need to segregate it and deny others access to your so called club?

Pray tell, how would you ensure that all members had reached the joining requirements? This is the internet after all, and as such, is faceless. What would you do if you found out someone who joined your 'white only' club was black? Would you ban them? Abuse them? Advise them they are not welcome because they do not meet the 'white' only criteria of your little club?

Your little club would not only be divisive, but it would also be hateful as it would provide a breeding ground for the likes of those who would normally belong to the KKK for example. Hey, there's an idea. Why don't you join their forums? I am sure there are quite a few 'white only' forums around where you can display 'pride in your ancestry'.:rolleyes:

I must admit, I was quite astounded when I heard of this little debacle. I would never have assumed that you would have even wanted one of these clubs as you have always been so vocally against such measures in the past when people have linked stories about them in their threads.

Suddenly, in the midst of it all, Bells realizes the culprits of evil, who she once took for innocent puppies, have unveiled their plan to demorolize the society at its roots.

Suddenly, in the midst of it all, Bells realizes the culprits of evil, who she once took for innocent puppies, have unveiled their plan to demorolize the society at its roots.

good one.


This thread is beginning to look like a bad episode of the cosby show.

Suddenly, in the midst of it all, Bells realizes the culprits of evil, who she once took for innocent puppies, have unveiled their plan to demorolize the society at its roots.

On the contrary. I always recognised the evil. I just never realised the evil could also be so down right silly.

On the contrary. I always recognised the evil. I just never realised the evil could also be so down right silly.

oh?! So you think evil is silly???!!!:eek:

I cannot believe those words came from you James, I am disappointed in you.:bawl:

Hmm... maybe a little unnecessary. I have an unfortunate habit of meeting arrogance with arrogance, I guess.

You know the thread in question would have died fast anyway? In some ways you just validated their argument.

In the U.S there are black clubs, hispanic, Irish, Italian etc., it's not that big of a deal. I have to add that the U.S is much more advanced at diversity than most places.

If a policy for a forum is not in writing and readily available for the members to read, that policy does not exist.

James R.:

This is precisely the reaction I expected from you. I hoped for better, but obviously it was not to be.

Despots always expect to go unchallenged.

If it had been as innocent as you're now claiming, there would have been nothing that required "handling". Your own words betray you.

Contrary to your belief, James R., I do not post to offend or please your sensibilities. However, it is well known that you hide behind anti-reason, bigotry, and a zealous love of Leftist politics in order to meet everything that rubs you the wrong way. Ergo, you cannot handle something, even if really, you needn't handle anything whatsoever.

Hoisted on your own petard, again.

So we are not allowed to create groups based on ancestry?

Privy tell us what is wrong with this, commissar?

I explained exactly why you were banned in the first post of this thread. Please read it again if it hasn't sunk in.

I am sorry, good sir, but I do not understand "absurdity". Perhaps you can tanslate into reasoned English?

You're an intelligent guy. Think carefully as you contemplate where you want to take this from here. At this stage, I don't require an apology from you. You can have your white pride.

I will indeed have pride in my ancestry. However, this necessitates that I take you to task against the lies you spread abot me, Mr. R.

All I see here is cowardice and abuse of power. If you'd care to put up or shut up, we might get somewhere.

You know the thread in question would have died fast anyway? In some ways you just validated their argument.

In the U.S there are black clubs, hispanic, Irish, Italian etc., it's not that big of a deal. I have to add that the U.S is much more advanced at diversity than most places.Certainly Canada, Australia and New Zealand are far more socially advanced than the USA. Most of Europe too. The few racist Euros here that hate Muslims are a minority. Nothing whatsoever 'advanced' about the USA but weapons technology and torture techniques.

Bells:

You and Hillyer begin a movement to form a segregated club in these forums, a forum which does not belong to you by the way, where only white members would be allowed to join. You get a 3 day ban (which is quite light if you ask me) and you are complaining?

There is no rule that says one cannot make an informal club on this forum, nor any rule that says this club cannot be segregated according to the wishes.

But yes, you comprehend the matter.

You claim you are not a white supremacists, yet I can point to many of your posts where you claim that your colour makes you superior to anyone of colour. Hmmmm... I won't bother to point out the bleeding obvious at this point.

Put up or shut up, Bells.

I await these "many of your posts".

I'd have you copy and paste them verbatim and in context and include a link to each thread you take them from.

Bleating that you were banned for celebrating your ancestry is basically a crock. You were attempting to form a private club, in a forum that does not belong to you. Said club would only be open to certain members who were part of a certain race and colour. And you dare hide behind pride of your ancestry as an excuse? So to be proud of your ancestry, you need to segregate it and deny others access to your so called club?

Do wrestling clubs admit non-wrestlers? Do chess clubs admit non-chess players? Do book clubs admit non-readers?

No.

Why then should we accept non-whites into a white ancestry club?

We're not excluding out of malice, only out of prerequisites.

Pray tell, how would you ensure that all members had reached the joining requirements? This is the internet after all, and as such, is faceless. What would you do if you found out someone who joined your 'white only' club was black? Would you ban them? Abuse them? Advise them they are not welcome because they do not meet the 'white' only criteria of your little club?

They would be excluded from further participation.

Your little club would not only be divisive, but it would also be hateful as it would provide a breeding ground for the likes of those who would normally belong to the KKK for example. Hey, there's an idea. Why don't you join their forums? I am sure there are quite a few 'white only' forums around where you can display 'pride in your ancestry'.

I do not support the KKK's policies, Bells. I am not into white power or anti-black measures. I only like my ancestry, like presumably everyone here. Unless this forum breaks with human tradition and is filled with people who detest everyone of their ancestors and wish they were something else. If so, I offer these people only pity. What a shame that they hate themselves so.

I must admit, I was quite astounded when I heard of this little debacle. I would never have assumed that you would have even wanted one of these clubs as you have always been so vocally against such measures in the past when people have linked stories about them in their threads.

Political protests take many forms, Bells.

Political protests take many forms, Bells.

http://www.indymedia.ie/attachments/migration/img_up/up_3/3780_5.JPG

http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/feministdemo.jpg

http://www.enmassefilms.org/img/stonetrail400a.gif

"Certainly Canada, Australia and New Zealand are far more socially advanced than the USA"

New York City is a model of diversity, no place like it in the world.

"Certainly Canada, Australia and New Zealand are far more socially advanced than the USA"

New York City is a model of diversity, no place like it in the world.

...when you say the world...you only mean planet Earth? right?:bugeye:

this world, yes.

this world, yes.

exactly.

Genji took off---ha ha ha

We could sail away
Or catch a freight train
Or a rocketship into outer space
Nothin' left to do
Too many things were said
To ever make it feel
Like yesterday did

Seasons must change
Separate paths, separate ways
If we blame it on anything
Let's blame it on the rain

I knew it all along
I'd have to write this song
Too young to fall in love
Guess we knew it all along

That's alright, that's okay
We were walkin' through some youth
Smilin' through some pain
That's alright, that's okay
Let's turn the page

:bawl:

Genji took off---ha ha ha

We could sail away
Or catch a freight train
Or a rocketship into outer space
Nothin' left to do
Too many things were said
To ever make it feel
Like yesterday did

Seasons must change
Separate paths, separate ways
If we blame it on anything
Let's blame it on the rain

I knew it all along
I'd have to write this song
Too young to fall in love
Guess we knew it all along

That's alright, that's okay
We were walkin' through some youth
Smilin' through some pain
That's alright, that's okay
Let's turn the page

:bawl::confused: Yeah. I took off, for lunch. I'm at work. Canada, Australia and New Zealand are FAR more socially advanced than NYC which is divided up into ethnic and racial 'buroughs.' You implying you live among Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Gays and Asians? Bullshit. Where are you" Bedford Stuy?:rolleyes:

(The white power guy boasting his city is 'diverse.' Interesting.....

"Where are you" Bedford Stuy?"

Bushwick- next town over, grew up there, lived there 'till 25yo.

"You implying you live among Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Gays and Asians?"

Yes

"Where are you" Bedford Stuy?"

Bushwick- next town over, grew up there, lived there 'till 25yo.

"You implying you live among Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Gays and Asians?"

YesOops! You know what? I mixed you up with Prince James. SORRY!

ha ha, thats ok buddy :)-Z

:runaway: :runaway: Whew!!!!
I'm just glad this forum returnd to its middle-of-da-road mediocrity and free-thuoght and expression is allowed...just as long as it keeps within the lines.

I love censorship and the ways it is excused.

Genji:

Actually, I live in a neighbourhood that is populated by:

WASPS, Lesbians, Reform Jews, Irish Catholics, and Puerto Rican Catholics.

My landlord is an Irish Catholic married to a Puerto Rican Catholic.

My second-floor neighbour are a Jewish couple with two kids.

The boroughs of New York are hardly segregated, however, we do tend to have ethnic neighbourhoods. And even in this neighbourhood, we tend to stay in different areas of it.

Genji:

Oh, and the Italian mob has a hang out about three blocks from my house. And one of the largest Moslem neighbourhoods in all of New York is under a mile from where i live.

this world, yes.

John, silly, not just the "mid-north-western" hemisphere, there are at least , I don't know, 3 other hemispheres to count oo. ( I think anyways) .

Prince_James:

Contrary to your belief, James R., I do not post to offend or please your sensibilities.

No? How disappointing.

However, it is well known that you hide behind anti-reason, bigotry, and a zealous love of Leftist politics in order to meet everything that rubs you the wrong way.

You're really going off the rails now. Bigotry? It would be interesting to see you try to justify that accusation, but I'm sure you won't let actual facts get in the way of a good insult.

So we are not allowed to create groups based on ancestry?

Privy tell us what is wrong with this, commissar?

Read the first post of this thread. This is the second time I've had to tell you.

There is no rule that says one cannot make an informal club on this forum, nor any rule that says this club cannot be segregated according to the wishes.

There is now. Take your club elsewhere. Start a club website. Go join the KKK, for all I care. Just don't expect to organise your racism from here.

...I am not into white power or anti-black measures. I only like my ancestry, like presumably everyone here.

Then your ancestry club should be all-inclusive, should it not?

No, what you like is not so much your ancestry, but the idea of white ancestry as superior to every other ancestry. And on what basis? Your self-centred whiteness, presumably.

There is no rule that says one cannot make an informal club on this forum, nor any rule that says this club cannot be segregated according to the wishes.


There has never been a need to have such a rule since I guess no one had thought anyone would be so stupid as to even suggest it.

The question that needs to be asked is why do you think sciforums is in need of a white only club? Keeping in mind that this is an internet forum and just about everything pertaining to race can and is discussed and rarely moderated. So why do you wish to belong to a 'white only' club in a science forum?

Do wrestling clubs admit non-wrestlers? Do chess clubs admit non-chess players? Do book clubs admit non-readers?

No.

Why then should we accept non-whites into a white ancestry club?

We're not excluding out of malice, only out of prerequisites.

Why do you need to have a 'whites only' club?

After all, this is a forum open to everyone, regardless of race, religion, sex or colour. If you feel the need to belong to such a club, why don't you join one elsewhere? Why are you attempting to segregate this forum?

They would be excluded from further participation.

Why? After all, how would you know if all your members were in fact white? What would one have to do to meet whatever criteria you have set out? White is but a colour and lends nothing to one's ancestry. For example, an albino African would have the right to join because they would be white. Or would you restrict it to race? In which case it would be quite racist as well.

But why do you think some members should be denied the right to participate based on colour or race alone? Is it because you are all so weak that you cannot contemplate an opposing view?

Can't you even see how down right stupid it is to even have a 'whites only' club, or club for any colour for that matter, on the internet? How would you exclude the individual from participating? Would you ban them from the discussion? Again, keep in mind that you are not the owners of this site, so how would you go about doing that? How would you know all your members were in fact white?

And if you feel so inclined to join such a club, why don't you join one of the already established 'whites only' forums that exist on the internet?

I do not support the KKK's policies, Bells. I am not into white power or anti-black measures. I only like my ancestry, like presumably everyone here. Unless this forum breaks with human tradition and is filled with people who detest everyone of their ancestors and wish they were something else. If so, I offer these people only pity. What a shame that they hate themselves so.
So if a black person who had a white ancestor wished to join your little club and show pride in said ancestor, he would be denied entry or the right to participate because it is a 'whites only' club. You have said so yourself, they would not be allowed to participate.

Why do you think the only way to show pride in your ancestry is to segregate everyone who is not a particular colour? Aren't you insulting your ancestry by doing so?

So you say you aren't into "white power or anti-black measures", but you would deny a black person from participating in your forum? Yes, that makes sense and is not in any way hypocritical.:rolleyes:

Political protests take many forms, Bells.
So you think that this is a political protest?

Against what? Or more to the point, against who exactly?

Against the blacks or non-white members in this forum? If that is the case, you might have to revise the 'I am not into "white power or anti-black measures"' stance you supposedly adopted above.

Put up or shut up, Bells.

I await these "many of your posts".

I'd have you copy and paste them verbatim and in context and include a link to each thread you take them from.
So you don't think your colour makes you more superior to blacks for example? You are denying this?

I can say with reasonable certainty that I am smarter than 99 percent of Africans in this world. However, there are a few African geniuses that probably are smarter than me.

Also, I have no idea how many Ph.D.s Africans hold. But you will note that I actually -am- pursuing a Ph.D. in philosophy.
Link (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=56984&page=8)



The United States ranks 22nd in IQ. As thought, Oriental and white nations lead the pack, with many African nations having an average IQ bordering or equivalent to retarded people.
Link (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=60584&page=2&highlight=black)

No... You're not a white supremacist at all.:rolleyes:

As to Survivor:

As a white man, I would be ashamed if the white team did not win. I am rooting for them as they are my people and I hope the blacks, hispanics, and orientals not only do not win, but are defeated utterly.
Link (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=57214&highlight=black)

God forbid that your colour be beaten by those you have deemed to be beneath you and your colour based superiority.

What is the definiton of a white supremacist again?

white supremacist - a person who believes that the white race is or should be supreme
Link (http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/white%20supremacist)


Hmmmmm...

There are more, but it appears that I have to go. More important matters call.

James R.:

You're really going off the rails now. Bigotry? It would be interesting to see you try to justify that accusation, but I'm sure you won't let actual facts get in the way of a good insult.

Easy peasy.

Here is one of your shining moments of refutation of scientific evidence as part of your ideological campaign:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=61052&page=18

By the way: This is what we call "putting up".

Read the first post of this thread. This is the second time I've had to tell you.

I'm sorry, James R., I didn't mean to be insensitive of the fact that you apparently do not understand reasoned English. I would speak absurd to you, but I never took any classes in it.

There is now. Take your club elsewhere. Start a club website. Go join the KKK, for all I care. Just don't expect to organise your racism from here.

Three questions:

Since when do you own this forum, James R., that you should be able to decide what is and what is not allowed as a policy of Sciforums.com? Have you recently been given ownership, or even administration duties?

What was "racist" about my club? This has yet to be addressed.

Since when does ex post facto declarations hold sway here?

Then your ancestry club should be all-inclusive, should it not?

Why? We wanted to celebrate a specific type of ancestry related to us. Aka: White ancestry. Should chess clubs admit checker players? If so, then I suppose I'm waiting for my Chess Tournament to be censured for not letting those in.

I'm sure both Lord Hillyer and I would agree that we'd have no problem affiliating the club under an umbrella category of "ancestry clubs". Everyone should be proud of their ancestors, but we would like to discuss our own alone.

No, what you like is not so much your ancestry, but the idea of white ancestry as superior to every other ancestry. And on what basis? Your self-centred whiteness, presumably.

Please quote where I have said that "white ancestry is superior to every other ancestry"?

Prince_James....you're an intelligent guy....

Good Lord! James R, how on Earth did you arrive at that conclusion??? :eek:

....and thats where the huge gigantic blocks of text had cause me convulging from the epileptical seizure.

I have to wonder at just how they would have ensured their members would have been white only.:rolleyes:

Imagine the paranoia. If a 'member' started sounding coloured.. You could just imagine the PM's...

'Pssst... I think we have been infiltrated'...
Did you ever see the bit about the black KKK member? It was hilarious. The guy was blind and raised by whites. When he found out he was black, he immediately divorced his wife for being a 'nigger lover".

What was "racist" about my club? This has yet to be addressed.
biologically speaking none. there are no specific genes that determine race.
so with that in mind your "whites-only" club doesn't exist and it never will.

don't tell me you are another JB.

Should chess clubs admit checker players? If so, then I suppose I'm waiting for my Chess Tournament to be censured for not letting those in.
look around PJ and you will see that the above is a typical propaganda ploy of the racist.

Bells:

There has never been a need to have such a rule since I guess no one had thought anyone would be so stupid as to even suggest it.

Sucks to be them, doesn't it?

The question that needs to be asked is why do you think sciforums is in need of a white only club? Keeping in mind that this is an internet forum and just about everything pertaining to race can and is discussed and rarely moderated. So why do you wish to belong to a 'white only' club in a science forum?

Enjoyment of our culture in an area devoted to "free thought".

Why do you need to have a 'whites only' club?

See above.

After all, this is a forum open to everyone, regardless of race, religion, sex or colour. If you feel the need to belong to such a club, why don't you join one elsewhere? Why are you attempting to segregate this forum?

We are not segregating anyone more than any other thread that asks for certain people. For instance, my chess tournament asks, obviously, for chess players.

Why? After all, how would you know if all your members were in fact white? What would one have to do to meet whatever criteria you have set out? White is but a colour and lends nothing to one's ancestry. For example, an albino African would have the right to join because they would be white. Or would you restrict it to race? In which case it would be quite racist as well.

We take them on their word until there is other evidence.

And the term "white" in this context means a specific type of person, of which the colloquial usage of the term should be apparent.

But yes, we are restricting it to a racist. However, it is not racist: This is not a matter of malice.

But why do you think some members should be denied the right to participate based on colour or race alone? Is it because you are all so weak that you cannot contemplate an opposing view?

It did not fit the role of the thread, which was for people of a certain ancestry to enjoy said ancestry.

Can't you even see how down right stupid it is to even have a 'whites only' club, or club for any colour for that matter, on the internet? How would you exclude the individual from participating? Would you ban them from the discussion? Again, keep in mind that you are not the owners of this site, so how would you go about doing that? How would you know all your members were in fact white?

We would ask them to leave and then ignore their input. We might even press the ignore button.

And if you feel so inclined to join such a club, why don't you join one of the already established 'whites only' forums that exist on the internet?

Same reason anyone joins sciforums: To discuss stuff here.

For instance: I could join a philosophy forum to discuss philosophy, or a math forum to discuss math, or a sci-fi forum to discuss sci-fi...But whoops, all those are here, too!

So if a black person who had a white ancestor wished to join your little club and show pride in said ancestor, he would be denied entry or the right to participate because it is a 'whites only' club. You have said so yourself, they would not be allowed to participate.

We require majority ancestry as reported by the individual, as far as I am aware. Hillyer and I would have probably considered such people, though.

Why do you think the only way to show pride in your ancestry is to segregate everyone who is not a particular colour? Aren't you insulting your ancestry by doing so?

How so?

All groups segregate some members. Does it insult their group's premise?

So you say you aren't into "white power or anti-black measures", but you would deny a black person from participating in your forum? Yes, that makes sense and is not in any way hypocritical.

How is that? It is a prerequisite, nothing more. I am not calling said black person a nigger, or suggesting they pick cotton, or anything hateful. I am simply saying: Whoa man, we want to enjoy our ancestry. Sorry guy, but it is pretty clear you don't fit the bill. If you want to celebrate your ancestry, you can enjoy it somewhere else. That's fine.

So you think that this is a political protest?

In part, yes.

Against what? Or more to the point, against who exactly?

Double-standards.

So you don't think your colour makes you more superior to blacks for example? You are denying this?

Yes, I deny this statement.

“ Originally Posted by Prince_James
I can say with reasonable certainty that I am smarter than 99 percent of Africans in this world. However, there are a few African geniuses that probably are smarter than me.

Also, I have no idea how many Ph.D.s Africans hold. But you will note that I actually -am- pursuing a Ph.D. in philosophy.

I provided empirical evidence in a scientific book claiming that the average IQ in several African countries was within the retarded range in tha thread. As I am not retarded, but in fact have a 156 IQ, I'm afraid this means I am almost surely smarter than the vast majority of those living in said African nations.

Also, I did not say "being white" makes me superior in intelligence. But I am white. I might as well be from any other nation that has high average IQs, such as Japan, Korea, or Singapore.

“ The United States ranks 22nd in IQ. As thought, Oriental and white nations lead the pack, with many African nations having an average IQ bordering or equivalent to retarded people.
Link ”

No... You're not a white supremacist at all.

I am going to requote myself to reply to this. Pay attention to the bolded word. Then tell me why a "white supremascist" would affirm this:

The United States ranks 22nd in IQ. As thought, Oriental and white nations lead the pack, with many African nations having an average IQ bordering or equivalent to retarded people.

Also take into consideration that I provided a source of my assertions in a published book from experts in the field.

“ As to Survivor:

As a white man, I would be ashamed if the white team did not win. I am rooting for them as they are my people and I hope the blacks, hispanics, and orientals not only do not win, but are defeated utterly.
Link ”

Of course I would be. Why would I not want my people to win? And to win gloriously?

When I root for the Yankees, or cheer for the Jets, or applaud Fedor Emelyanenko, am I not supporting their/his ultimate victory?

You will also note the entire purpose of said season on Survivor was to root along race-based lines.


God forbid that your colour be beaten by those you have deemed to be beneath you and your colour based superiority.

Not at all. I simply want my race to win in a competition between races. They are my chosen team and one which I am a part of, by virtue of you know, being white.

white supremacist - a person who believes that the white race is or should be supreme

Last I checked, Survivor was not the world.

Or am I speaking to Jeff Probst?

leopold99:

Ever hear of the R1A1 and R1B phenotypes?

They correspond very well with the Indo-European peoples. The Western half which, as you ought to be aware, is classified as "white" colloquially.

http://mednews.stanford.edu/releases/2005/january/racial-data.htm
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/home/40507/

Does Race Exist?
If races are defined as genetically discrete groups, no. But researchers can use some genetic information to group individuals into clusters with medical relevance
http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=00055DC8-3BAA-1FA8-BBAA83414B7F0000

The term 'race' is usually used as a synonym for subspecies by biologists, though there is a degree of confusion over the term and both terms have a variety of meanings. There is no consensus definition for either subspecies or "race" in biology.[2][3][4] Some biologists do not accept the concept of classification below the species level whatsoever, arguing that subspecific classifications are not biological units and that they are subjective and arbitrary.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_multilocus_allele_clusters

do you have black blood PJ?

James, if someone makes a black only club, will you ban those people too?
Just want to know where the administration stands in this.

leopold99:

No, I am 100 percent white, from what I know. My ancestors came from:

Germany
Ireland
England
France
Sweden
Finland

Also:

http://www.jefallbright.net/node/3214

The small difference can mean a lot. It is also found (surprise!) right inside the racial groupings that have been in use.

as far as I know my ancestors and me are 100% russian

leopold99:

No, I am 100 percent white, from what I know. My ancestors came from:

Germany
Ireland
England
France
Sweden
Finland

Also:

http://www.jefallbright.net/node/3214

The small difference can mean a lot. It is also found (surprise!) right inside the racial groupings that have been in use.

jesus, you really are a mixed breed/mutt.

Spuriousmonkey:

My ancestors liked to screw. :)

No, I am 100 percent white, from what I know.

100%? you sure? especially when there is no genetic basis for race?
i hate to lay this on you PJ but you are black, whether you admit it or not.

Did you ever see the bit about the black KKK member? It was hilarious. The guy was blind and raised by whites. When he found out he was black, he immediately divorced his wife for being a 'nigger lover".
Heh!!

I have heard of that. But this would amount to the same thing. Bunch of faceless people saying they were white and no one could know for sure if they were or not. In short, they would be the blind individual who divorced his wife for being a 'nigger lover'.

James, if someone makes a black only club, will you ban those people too?
Just want to know where the administration stands in this.
Yes.

I would imagine (and hope) the rule would apply to anyone regardless of race, sex, colour, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

Sucks to be them, doesn't it?
More like sucks to be you..:p

Enjoyment of our culture in an area devoted to "free thought".
So why must you segregate to enjoy?

We are not segregating anyone more than any other thread that asks for certain people. For instance, my chess tournament asks, obviously, for chess players.
I see. People can choose to play chess or not. And ANY member is free to participate in the chess thread if they so choose, even if they do not play chess.

And I will remind you that the tournament itself is held in yahoo and not on sciforums. But the thread discussing the tournament is not restricted to only people who play chess and anyone can participate in it.

As you have been advised, you are free to start your little whites only club anywhere. There are lots of forums that offer such forms of segregation and attitudes. Sciforums does not. All members are free to participate in all threads and forums, regardless of their colour, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc. If you don't like it, tough. You knew what this forum was about when you joined.

We take them on their word until there is other evidence.

And the term "white" in this context means a specific type of person, of which the colloquial usage of the term should be apparent.

But yes, we are restricting it to a racist. However, it is not racist: This is not a matter of malice.
Do you have any idea how pathetic you sound?

The term "white" means white of skin colour and race. So anyone who had white ancestry but was not white in colour would not be allowed to participate. So much for having such a "club" to show appreciation for one's ancestry. It would appear that you would only allow people to show pride in their ancestry if they were a certain colour, regardless if they were 97% white. And you say it is not malicious racism?

I am disappointed in you PJ. I had never assumed you to be so shallow.

It did not fit the role of the thread, which was for people of a certain ancestry to enjoy said ancestry.
Only if they were white.

Ancestry means crap all basically. As long as they were white as designated by the title of the club.. "white only"..

We would ask them to leave and then ignore their input. We might even press the ignore button.
Why should anyone be restricted in what forums they participate in on sciforums? This was never a segregated community. And yet you wish to make it so.

Same reason anyone joins sciforums: To discuss stuff here.

For instance: I could join a philosophy forum to discuss philosophy, or a math forum to discuss math, or a sci-fi forum to discuss sci-fi...But whoops, all those are here, too!
Refer to above.

Anyone is free to participate in any thread and forum in sciforums. You wish to change that and have a colour coded club because you are a racist bigot.

How is that? It is a prerequisite, nothing more. I am not calling said black person a nigger, or suggesting they pick cotton, or anything hateful. I am simply saying: Whoa man, we want to enjoy our ancestry. Sorry guy, but it is pretty clear you don't fit the bill. If you want to celebrate your ancestry, you can enjoy it somewhere else. That's fine.
And if said black person had white European ancestry, and wished to show pride in that? What then?

Double-standards.
What double standard?

No one is allowed to form their own particular club that restricts or refuses 'membership' in any thread or forum. I take it you missed this bit in the opening thread:

sciforums administrators and moderators are very tolerant of discussions of controversial issues, including the matter of race. Discussions of race and various associated matters have been quite common - some would say popular - among certain members of sciforums in recent times, and vigorous debates have been had. In general, such discussions have not been moderated.

The present instance is a completely different scenario. Here, we have two members of sciforums essentially seeking to split the sciforums community into "us" and "them" groups, divided along racist lines.

Such an action is contrary to the spirit of sciforums and will not be tolerated in any form. In this instance, the attempt to incite hatred among members was along lines of race, but we would equally look down upon any similar attempt along the lines of gender, religious belief, nationality and so on.
Link (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=63975)


So what double standard?

If you were allowed to go ahead with your little "whites only" club, YOU would be setting the double standard.

As you have been advised PJ, you are free to join segregated forums that do cater for your desire of segregation along racist lines. Sciforums was never about that. This is an open forum for all members to participate in all threads and forums as they so choose. If you don't like it, you are free to leave to find a forum that will cater to your personal desires.

leopold99:

The websites I gave you seem to indicate otherwise, regarding genetic foundations for race.

Bells:

So why must you segregate to enjoy?

To enjoy common ancestry, yes.

I see. People can choose to play chess or not. And ANY member is free to participate in the chess thread if they so choose, even if they do not play chess.

And I will remind you that the tournament itself is held in yahoo and not on sciforums. But the thread discussing the tournament is not restricted to only people who play chess and anyone can participate in it.

If you have no idea whatsoever how to play, you would not join it, and we would also ask you to leave. In fact, I have segregated at least one person - Draqon - for no-showing the last tournament.

As you have been advised, you are free to start your little whites only club anywhere. There are lots of forums that offer such forms of segregation and attitudes. Sciforums does not. All members are free to participate in all threads and forums, regardless of their colour, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc. If you don't like it, tough. You knew what this forum was about when you joined.

And we can ignore them and tell them they are not welcomed.

Do you have any idea how pathetic you sound?

I'm afraid I'm well acquainted with pathetic people. You, for instance...

The term "white" means white of skin colour and race. So anyone who had white ancestry but was not white in colour would not be allowed to participate. So much for having such a "club" to show appreciation for one's ancestry. It would appear that you would only allow people to show pride in their ancestry if they were a certain colour, regardless if they were 97% white. And you say it is not malicious racism?

No, actually. White means "ancestry". Someone with prominently dark skin from tanning does not become a non-white person. Nor are white ethnic groups, such as Greeks, who are darker skinned than say, Icelanders, excluded.

Only if they were white.

Yes. That was the ancestry in question.

Ancestry means crap all basically. As long as they were white as designated by the title of the club.. "white only"..

Do you tire of strawmen at all, Bells? You use them so much, one would imagine you'd get sick of them.

You are fully aware of what the term "white" means.

Why should anyone be restricted in what forums they participate in on sciforums? This was never a segregated community. And yet you wish to make it so.

They can post, but they will be ignored. They will also be asked to leave. And will be in violation of the rule of posting off topic in a thread.

Anyone is free to participate in any thread and forum in sciforums. You wish to change that and have a colour coded club because you are a racist bigot.

And you're a cranky cunt.

Shall we continue with childish name calling more?

And if said black person had white European ancestry, and wished to show pride in that? What then?

Do they classify themselves as primarily white? Is their black ancestry regulated to a distant relative?

If you were allowed to go ahead with your little "whites only" club, YOU would be setting the double standard.

Quoting James R. and his nonsense isn't very convincing, Bells.

And how would I be setting any double standard, once again? They are free to make their own club which has the exact opposite rules. How about "The Black Sciforums Members' Clubs"?

Or hey, Bells, how about you create in Free Thoughts: The Mixed-Race Sciforums Members' Club?

As you have been advised PJ, you are free to join segregated forums that do cater for your desire of segregation along racist lines. Sciforums was never about that. This is an open forum for all members to participate in all threads and forums as they so choose. If you don't like it, you are free to leave to find a forum that will cater to your personal desires.

I repeat again: There is no "racism" apparent here. Simply a devotion to one's own culture and race and a celebration of one's ancestry.

Moreover, you will note that there is no coercion in joining our club. It was informal and required no one outside of those who filled the prerequisites and desired entry.

So really, you have not a leg to stand on. But then again, this is not surprising. You aren't very competant in rational discourse, as proven once again.

leopold99:

The websites I gave you seem to indicate otherwise, regarding genetic foundations for race.
and the websites i gave you seem to say the opposite.
face it PJ, the stuff that makes black "black" is in your white skin.

now what was you saying about "whites only"?

Why do you want to create a racist club on Sciforums? To make a point?

Spuriousmonkey:

My ancestors liked to screw. :)

If you look at the treatment of race in science in the old days you will notice that you are not white. White never existed as a race. Germans, fins, swedes etc all belong to a difference race according to the extensive old literature. Within the population of Fins there are subdivisions even.

You are merely a product of 20th century American racism where races were divided into black and white for political purposes.

And hence you are just an ignorant racist, the product of American style racism that is not even based on old scientific literature.

Needless to say science grew up and abandoned race in favour of more fruitful scientific classifications. Unfortunately parts of society haven't.

I have to wonder at just how they would have ensured their members would have been white only.:rolleyes:
Webcam.

your tooth is starting to look like panties. uh, er, nevermind.

Spuriousmonkey:

I am well aware of the Nordic, Mediterrenean, and Alpine classifications of some early theories of race in regards to the Europeans.

Leopold99:

and the websites i gave you seem to say the opposite.
face it PJ, the stuff that makes black "black" is in your white skin.

now what was you saying about "whites only"?

I don't have black DNA, my good man. Melanin is hardly the factor here being discussed.

Crime scene DNA can even tell you what your grandparents were likely:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-08-16-dna_x.htm

Large-scale differences in DNA by population groups:

http://hum-molgen.org/NewsGen/08-2004/000001.html

Spuriousmonkey:

I am well aware of the Nordic, Mediterrenean, and Alpine classifications of some early theories of race in regards to the Europeans.

Then get lost with your white obsession. And get lost with your racist shit.

And if you are going to turn this thread in a racist propaganda shit thread I am going to infraction you. Because it seems you didn't quite get the message when you got banned the last time.

To enjoy common ancestry, yes.

How very narrow minded of you.

If you have no idea whatsoever how to play, you would not join it, and we would also ask you to leave. In fact, I have segregated at least one person - Draqon - for no-showing the last tournament.
You still don't get it. Your chess club is not on this site but on yahoo.

The chess thread here is open for all members to participate in.

And we can ignore them and tell them they are not welcomed.

Akin to this forum telling you that your whites only club is not welcome.

Nor would any club that excluded any other member due to their race, colour, sexual orientation, sex, religion, etc, be welcome. Don't you get it yet? The answer is no. Move on.

I'm afraid I'm well acquainted with pathetic people. You, for instance...
You left out the 'ner ner'...:rolleyes:

No, actually. White means "ancestry". Someone with prominently dark skin from tanning does not become a non-white person. Nor are white ethnic groups, such as Greeks, who are darker skinned than say, Icelanders, excluded.
Oh dear lord. White is a colour. An African can be white in colour. It says nothing about about their ancestry.

They can post, but they will be ignored. They will also be asked to leave. And will be in violation of the rule of posting off topic in a thread.
Again, you are free to find forums that will cater to your need for segregation. Sciforums does not.

And you're a cranky cunt.
My my, aren't you a class act...

Shall we continue with childish name calling more?
Do it again and I will give you an infraction.:)

Quoting James R. and his nonsense isn't very convincing, Bells.

And how would I be setting any double standard, once again? They are free to make their own club which has the exact opposite rules. How about "The Black Sciforums Members' Clubs"?

Or hey, Bells, how about you create in Free Thoughts: The Mixed-Race Sciforums Members' Club?
Why would I want to join any such club? I never joined sciforums to then join a segregated club. This forum has never allowed such clubs.

I repeat again: There is no "racism" apparent here. Simply a devotion to one's own culture and race and a celebration of one's ancestry.
Oh?

Wasn't you who said:

"But yes, we are restricting it to a racist. However, it is not racist: This is not a matter of malice."

You do realise that racism is not just about malice don't you? However I will say that after reading some of your replies in this thread, malice is not something you would not partake in.

Again, you are free to show your devotion to your culture, race and ancestry all you want. You just can't segregate or restrict who can post in the threads you start. In short, you cannot split the forums to have a racist club.

So really, you have not a leg to stand on. But then again, this is not surprising. You aren't very competant in rational discourse, as proven once again.
Considering you have already been refused and banned and refused again and again as per your request, I would say you are the one without a leg to stand on. And before you accuse me of not being incompetent in rational discourse, let me remind you that you are the one that sunk so low as to call me a "cunt".

So throw all the little tantrums you so choose. At the end of the day you still won't get to start up a racist club on these forums. Again, I will remind you that you are free to join other forums that will cater to your desire to segregate. Such forms of segregation is not welcome here.

Leopold99:
I don't have black DNA, my good man. Melanin is hardly the factor here being discussed.

really?
you never did describe what "white only" means.

the fact is PJ that "white only" doesn't exist. there is no such animal.

edit:
and cunts do get cranky when they are pregnant.

PJ
here's your black:
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1172126563/Monster_of_a_Man_Lifts_a_Refridgerator

spuriousmonkey:

And if you are going to turn this thread in a racist propaganda shit thread I am going to infraction you. Because it seems you didn't quite get the message when you got banned the last time.

Racist propoganda shit?

It's a SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE.

Do you see "Adolf Hilter" in the citations?

Do you see "David Duke" in the citations?

No.

Last I checked, this was supposedly a "science forum". If you don't like my data, show me where it is wrong scientifically.

Moreover: I will not stop this "white obsession". Modern science verifies it through these and other studies. I have more obligation to the truth than to you.

spuriousmonkey:



Racist propoganda shit?

It's a SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE.

Do you see "Adolf Hilter" in the citations?

Do you see "David Duke" in the citations?

No.

Last I checked, this was supposedly a "science forum". If you don't like my data, show me where it is wrong scientifically.

Moreover: I will not stop this "white obsession". Modern science verifies it through these and other studies. I have more obligation to the truth than to you.

That's not a scientific article microcephalon!

Bells:

How very narrow minded of you.

How is it narrow minded to enjoy the company of very remote kin?

You still don't get it. Your chess club is not on this site but on yahoo.

The chess thread here is open for all members to participate in.

Yes. And they can participate in. But we'll simply ignore them.

Post as much as you want in the White Sciforums Member Club. It doesn't matter. But as you are not a member, your opinion won't matter.

Akin to this forum telling you that your whites only club is not welcome.

Considering it didn't violate what it was claimed to...

Nor would any club that excluded any other member due to their race, colour, sexual orientation, sex, religion, etc, be welcome. Don't you get it yet? The answer is no. Move on.

No thank you.

You left out the 'ner ner'...

I'm afraid I prefer "nananana poo-poo".

Oh dear lord. White is a colour. An African can be white in colour. It says nothing about about their ancestry.

I think your blatant abuse of the word is apparent enough to go without further elaboration?

Would you prefer I use the more wordy "Western Indo-European of the Phenotype R1A1 or R1B with exclusive or near-exclusive ancestry in these phenotypes, as expressed by people in the continent of Europe and her seed nations"?

My my, aren't you a class act...

Insults go both ways, darling.

Do it again and I will give you an infraction.

Why don't you give yourself an infraction for calling me a racist and a bigot unwarrantedly?

Why would I want to join any such club? I never joined sciforums to then join a segregated club. This forum has never allowed such clubs.

There is nothing at all in the rules that says "no clubs that segregate based on _____".

That there hasn't been is testament to Lord Hillyer and I not being here. That's all.

You do realise that racism is not just about malice don't you? However I will say that after reading some of your replies in this thread, malice is not something you would not partake in.

By the way: A slip of the finger there. I had meant to say " we are restricting it to a race" not "racist".

Anyway: What malice have I brought here? Besides calling some people out that are spreading filth against myself, Lord Hillyer, and others?

Also, to quote the dictionary on the term racist:

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

None of that was at all apparent in the thread.

Again, you are free to show your devotion to your culture, race and ancestry all you want. You just can't segregate or restrict who can post in the threads you start. In short, you cannot split the forums to have a racist club.

Again: How is it racist? None of the definitions above were met.

Or how about this:

We make a club again, say nothing about segregation, but just ignore non-white participants?

Considering you have already been refused and banned and refused again and again as per your request, I would say you are the one without a leg to stand on. And before you accuse me of not being incompetent in rational discourse, let me remind you that you are the one that sunk so low as to call me a "cunt".

Refused and banned outside the legitimacy of power. James R. is using this as an excuse to go on a crusade and abusing his powers.

Moreover, I calls them as I sees them. Take that as you want.

Leopold99:

really?
you never did describe what "white only" means.

See my post to Bells for a wordy definition of "white". As apparently, you are completely ignorant of terms used in the vernacular.

Spuriousmonkey:

Rectal postule, apparently you have failed to read any of my posts where articles were presented that speak of scientific findings. If you would like to debate them, please publish a study that refutes their claims in a peer-reviewed journal, like they have done and which was reported on.

Post a peer-reviewed article showing the existence of biological races. I will read it. And if I find the article itself does not state that there are biological races I will undertake action.

And no funny business of posting some old article. Anyone can find a racist article in the past.

Leopold99:



See my post to Bells for a wordy definition of "white". As apparently, you are completely ignorant of terms used in the vernacular.
you don't need to cop a shitty attitude PJ.
the fact is that i haven't read your posts to bells, K?

in the meantime here's a little something for your sock:
The Only Race Is Human Race
No Biological Basis for Race
New data from the mapping of the human genome reveal that all humans are incredibly similar-in fact, we are 99.9% genetically identical. We are all members of one species, Homo sapiens. Scientists have confirmed, as they long suspected, that there is no genetic or biological basis for race.
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/genomics/1_identity/ninety_nine.html

I don't know who Prince James is trying to kid, he's blatantly racist.

Post as much as you want in the White Sciforums Member Club. It doesn't matter. But as you are not a member, your opinion won't matter.

What club?

There is no club.

Insults go both ways, darling.
Indeed. However I doubt what I said warranted the reply I got from you. But I guess I should not be surprised by your actions and words.

Why don't you give yourself an infraction for calling me a racist and a bigot unwarrantedly?
I can't give myself an infraction. However if I were in the wrong, I am sure one of the other moderators would have pointed it out to me by now.

Anyway: What malice have I brought here? Besides calling some people out that are spreading filth against myself, Lord Hillyer, and others?
Spreading what filth? You were told no to the club idea. The only filth that has been spread so far has been by you since your ban expired.

You were banned so now I guess you are feeling either a bit embarrassed or foolish for what you had been proposing to propose. So you probably find yourself in the position that if you back down now and just let the subject drop, you might be seen as being weak.

I see that Hill has failed to make an appearance to support you. Neither has anyone else who was supposedly slandered.

So this leaves you with the chant 'we shall overcome'. Amusing really. Although I am sure that will change once PM's start being sent out.. lol.. 'Support the cause' eh?

We make a club again, say nothing about segregation, but just ignore non-white participants?
Still don't get it?

There is no club in these forums. Sure you might start a thread and call it a club amongst yourself in PM, but any whiff that you were attempting to segregate the forum and it would be bye bye to thread. After all, you are a member like everyone else. You could ignore what they were saying but it would be open to everyone to participate in and after a short while when it would be plainly obvious what you were doing, the thread would be closed and cesspooled.

Refused and banned outside the legitimacy of power. James R. is using this as an excuse to go on a crusade and abusing his powers.
Is he?

He is part of the administration of these forums. And he has been acting within his powers as an administrator of these forums.

Or are you doing all of this to attempt to prove a point?

Didn't Prince_James once complain about clubs for minority races which didn't like to host whites, whining about how whites are treated so badly? And now he's trying to get involved with a whites-only, white-supremacist club?

Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists.

Looks like whites are treated badly when they can't even form a whites only forum here without being called nazis. Just another example of the double standard in this society.

Spuriousmonkey:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?src=hw&site_area=sci&fulltext=Race

The scientific journal Science. All are paid for, but if you are interested, pursue several of them, all relating to new findings that imply race is indeed a genetic reality.

Specifically consider these:

HUMAN GENETICS: In Asians and Whites, Gene Expression Varies by Race
Jennifer Couzin

CANCER RESEARCH: Probing the Roots of Race and Cancer
Jennifer Couzin
Science 2 February 2007 315: 592-594 [DOI: 10.1126/science.315.5812.592]

Race and Immunity

Science 17 December 2004 306: 2036 [DOI: 10.1126/science.306.5704.2036c]

Specifically, this journal article (not on that list) affirms the usefulness and reality of race:

1 Risch N, Burchard E, Ziv E, Tang H. Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease. Genome Biol 2002;3/7/ comment2007.1–2007.12.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1438.html

Affirms the reality of race:

The emerging picture is that populations do, generally, cluster by broad geographic regions that correspond with common racial classification (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Americas).

Looks like whites are treated badly when they can't even form a whites only forum here without being called nazis. Just another example of the double standard in this society.
What DS? Is there a black only forum here then?

prince james..i was ignorant of these goings on.

im going to dedicate my thumping of you in our upcoming chess game to the brown people of the world, as i am half turkish.

No.

"Such is the idiocy and myopia of racists" on the internet.

I have to wonder at just how they would have ensured their members would have been white only.:rolleyes:

Imagine the paranoia. If a 'member' started sounding coloured.. You could just imagine the PM's...

'Pssst... I think we have been infiltrated'...

The whole idea was a spur of a moment goof to demonstrate the hypocrisy of a black police association in the UK. Intolerant liberals like yourself couldn't wait to crush it just like how it works in the free world.

The whole idea was a spur of a moment goof to demonstrate the hypocrisy of a black police association in the UK. Intolerant liberals like yourself couldn't wait to crush it just like how it works in the free world.

Cute.

Leopold99:

Sorry if I sounded a bit snappy.

in the meantime here's a little something for your sock:
The Only Race Is Human Race
No Biological Basis for Race
New data from the mapping of the human genome reveal that all humans are incredibly similar-in fact, we are 99.9% genetically identical. We are all members of one species, Homo sapiens. Scientists have confirmed, as they long suspected, that there is no genetic or biological basis for race.
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/geno...nety_nine.html

New revelations imply otherwise. See some of the above articles I posted.

Moreover, it should be noted: That even if the above was true, we are also 99 percent like Chimpanzees. Clearly, small precentages of DNA = large differences.

NIckelodeon:

Go back to putting old-time sitcoms on the air at night.

Heh edited too soon..

Looks like whites are treated badly when they can't even form a whites only forum here without being called nazis. Just another example of the double standard in this society.

So treating you the same as everyone else is now 'treating you badly'? How so?

And how is treating you equally to everyone else suddenly a double standard? Do you see a forum designated as a blacks forum? No. Jewish forum? No. Asian? No. So how exactly is it a double standard that you are treated like everyone else? No one else is allowed to have a club or forum just for their particular racial, coloured, sex, sexual orientation, religious group. Why do you think you should be so special and different to every other member here?

As has been mentioned countless of times, if you wish to join a whites only forum, there are plenty of them floating around the internet. Sciforums however, does not supply such a service.:)

The Devil Inside:

I look forward to it, you Turkish coffee drinking bafoon! ;)

its going to hurt so much, ill make jim crow rise from the grave to scream in pain.

Cute.

You should know about double standards living in South Africa. The only country in the world with "affirmative action" for the majority of the population!

You should know about double standards living in South Africa. The only country in the world with "affirmative action" for the majority of the population!

i can tell by this post that you are around 16 years old....am i correct?
forget everything else, and just tell me if i am correct.

Spuriousmonkey:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?src=hw&site_area=sci&fulltext=Race

The scientific journal Science. All are paid for, but if you are interested, pursue several of them, all relating to new findings that imply race is indeed a genetic reality.

Specifically consider these:

HUMAN GENETICS: In Asians and Whites, Gene Expression Varies by Race
Jennifer Couzin

CANCER RESEARCH: Probing the Roots of Race and Cancer
Jennifer Couzin
Science 2 February 2007 315: 592-594 [DOI: 10.1126/science.315.5812.592]

Race and Immunity

Science 17 December 2004 306: 2036 [DOI: 10.1126/science.306.5704.2036c]

Specifically, this journal article (not on that list) affirms the usefulness and reality of race:

1 Risch N, Burchard E, Ziv E, Tang H. Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease. Genome Biol 2002;3/7/ comment2007.1–2007.12.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1438.html

Affirms the reality of race:

The emerging picture is that populations do, generally, cluster by broad geographic regions that correspond with common racial classification (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Americas).

You didn't read any of them. The first two on the list are from the 70s.

the third one is not a peer-reviewed article.

4th one isn't either.

5th one either.

HUMAN GENETICS: In Asians and Whites, Gene Expression Varies by Race
Jennifer Couzin

is a news article. Not a peer-reviewed article.

CANCER RESEARCH: Probing the Roots of Race and Cancer
Jennifer Couzin

is a news article. Not a peer-reviewed article.

You lose.

Heh edited too soon..

So treating you the same as everyone else is now 'treating you badly'? How so?

And how is treating you equally to everyone else suddenly a double standard? Do you see a forum designated as a blacks forum? No. Jewish forum? No. Asian? No. So how exactly is it a double standard that you are treated like everyone else? No one else is allowed to have a club or forum just for their particular racial, coloured, sex, sexual orientation, religious group. Why do you think you should be so special and different to every other member here?

As has been mentioned countless of times, if you wish to join a whites only forum, there are plenty of them floating around the internet. Sciforums however, does not supply such a service.:)

Too bad no one else tried opening up a "fill in the blank" only forum to test that theory.

Bells:

What club?

There is no club.

Indeed. But feel free to make it again and do so.

Or if I ever feel like doing something similar, feel free.

Indeed. However I doubt what I said warranted the reply I got from you. But I guess I should not be surprised by your actions and words.

How many hands tall is that high horse?

I can't give myself an infraction. However if I were in the wrong, I am sure one of the other moderators would have pointed it out to me by now.

Sure.

Spreading what filth? You were told no to the club idea. The only filth that has been spread so far has been by you since your ban expired.

False accusations, cover ups, name calling...

It truly is libellous.

You were banned so now I guess you are feeling either a bit embarrassed or foolish for what you had been proposing to propose. So you probably find yourself in the position that if you back down now and just let the subject drop, you might be seen as being weak.

Actually, not. This is more a matter of setting things right.

I don't respond well to official cowardice, you see.

So this leaves you with the chant 'we shall overcome'. Amusing really.

Deep in my heart, I do believe, that we shall overcome...some day.

There is no club in these forums. Sure you might start a thread and call it a club amongst yourself in PM, but any whiff that you were attempting to segregate the forum and it would be bye bye to thread. After all, you are a member like everyone else. You could ignore what they were saying but it would be open to everyone to participate in and after a short while when it would be plainly obvious what you were doing, the thread would be closed and cesspooled.

So now I am not permitted to make any threads regarding my ancestry?

What about other people's ancestry?

Or am I prohibited the right to discuss such things at all? And presumably all members?

Is he?

He is part of the administration of these forums. And he has been acting within his powers as an administrator of these forums.

He's using transparently underhanded tactics and used our ban to spread lies about us.

And like all good bigots, he refuses to address the matter by quoting me where I have claimed things.

Is he?

He is part of the administration of these forums. And he has been acting within his powers as an administrator of these forums.

Or are you doing all of this to attempt to prove a point?

Yes.

Perhaps if we created a thread for all the racists to post in, maybe then they would stop polluting the rest of the forum....;)

Or perhaps not.

I'd rather just delete them.

i can tell by this post that you are around 16 years old....am i correct?
forget everything else, and just tell me if i am correct.

What exactly is your problem with that statement? Too much truth in it?

Also, I should like to note in general:

So far, we have yet to establish even a single iota of any attempt on my part, Lord HIllyer, or any other poster in that thread, to "foment racial hatred".

That was the verbatim reason for our banning. Not "segregation". But that we were hate mongers, in essence.

The satisfaction of the criteria of hatred has not been met.

You can't even give me a peer-reviewed paper showing the evidence of human races.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1323719&postcount=112

What exactly is your problem with that statement? Too much truth in it?

answer my question, please.

Spuriousmonkey:

Actually, all of them are from credible academic journals subject to peer review. Do some research on the journals. Even Wiki will tell you their status as peer-reviewed.

Also, the ones from the 70's were irrelevant, and the ones noted were recent (I believe no ones were older than 2000).

Spuriousmonkey:

Actually, that thread stands as mute testament to what extent you will refuse to tolerate facts against your pseudo-scientific dogma. :)

You can't even give me a peer-reviewed paper showing the evidence of human races.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1323719&postcount=112

i dated a girl who was studying to become a biologist, for about five years. i used to proofread her papers to make sure her punctuation, etc etc was correct.

one of the most eye opening things i ever read was a study by an asian gentleman that very pointedly proved that race is almost purely cosmetic. prior to reading this article (and others that followed....it got me interested), i had no idea of this.

but, its pretty basic when you get down to it. environmental factors and closed gene pools created different looking people. thats all there is to it.

Specifically, this journal article (not on that list) affirms the usefulness and reality of race:

1 Risch N, Burchard E, Ziv E, Tang H. Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease. Genome Biol 2002;3/7/ comment2007.1–2007.12.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1438.html

Affirms the reality of race:

The emerging picture is that populations do, generally, cluster by broad geographic regions that correspond with common racial classification (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Americas).

HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Did you read that article????

We show that racial classifications are inadequate descriptors of the distribution of genetic variation in our species.

A conclusion:
But 'races' are neither homogeneous nor distinct for most genetic variation.

The article is pretty much projecting the view of individualism. It ends like this:

all individuals, independently conceived, are genetically unique.

Spuriousmonkey:

And you fail to add that:

Although populations do cluster by broad geographic regions, which generally correspond to socially recognized races, the distribution of genetic variation is quasicontinuous in clinal patterns related to geography. The broad global pattern reflects the accumulation of genetic drift associated with a recent African origin of modern humans, followed by expansion out of Africa and across the rest of the globe.

Aka: It may not work in all instances due to migration and drift and variation within races, but because...

The emerging picture is that populations do, generally, cluster by broad geographic regions that correspond with common racial classification (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Americas).

...it works SIGNIFICANTLY and races are verified biological fact.

Moreover, it is clear from the article that the reason that race is also considered inadequate is that race, like taxonomic genera, is a broad category. Sub-races of races would describe, in large part, the variation beneath it. For instance, you could have:

Species: Homo sapien.
Race: White.
Sub-Race: Celtic.

Or:

Species: Homo sapien.
Race: Black.
Sub-Race: Pygmy.

Or:

Species: Homo sapien.
Race: Oriental/East Asian.
Sub-Race: Tibetan.

answer my question, please.

I'm much older than 16.

http://genomebiology.com/2002/3/7/comment/2007

Another "race is real" journal article.

Race Doesn't Exist Huh?

[link deleted]

A story came down the pike this week about a black guy who needs blood transfusions. The American Red Cross is trying to help. Now, "we all know" that blood is blood. Hey, we all bleed red blood, right? "Gee, Ward," gushes a low consciousness, semi-sentient, June, "I'm white and this other person is black, but if you cut both of us we'll both bleed red blood. See, that just proves we're all the same and that race doesn't exist. It just makes me want to run right out and hug all of humanity."

That's the kind of crap that the genocidal blenders have been propagandizing us with for years. To understand that people who have different color skins, and different facial and other features, and different attributes of all types--different races--also have different types of blood is to reinforce a correct belief in the reality that there are different groupings of humans that we can logically call races, and that the races are different from each other from their blueprints on up.

Blenders don't want whites to think along these lines, because if they do so they may wake up from a blender induced hypnotic trance and begin questioning the blending premises. Whites might actually begin throwing off the conditioning and they might begin thinking for themselves again. They might even completely free their minds from the flat-world propaganda prison that so many white people find themselves in that is ringed all about with hate terms such as "racist," and "bigot." And, horror of horrors, whites just might start feeling good about being white and they might even start finding their true selves and begin demanding their God or nature given rights to self-identification, self-determination and separation.

We can be pretty sure that the American Red Cross, like most organizations and people in our society, are under the sway of the blending message--it's the temper of the times. However, that message sometimes comes in conflict with the Red Cross's desire to save lives. That's the case with the black guy mentioned above. Apparently, the Red Cross chapter involved in this story has plenty of sources for red blood, "Hey, we all bleed red blood." The problem is that they don't have that many sources for the right kind of red blood. They need black red blood. Most of what they have access to is white red blood. You see, the black guy they're trying to save needs red blood from black people. Not red blood from white people. Not red blood from red people. Not red blood from brown people. Not red blood from yellow people. Only red blood from black people will do. Upon reading the above, some of the flat world numbnuts in our society who don't believe in races will probably think this is all just some sort of racism. "Hey, blood is blood," they might say, with all the white aracial indignation that they can muster from their sorry brains. Sorry, numbnuts, blood is not just blood.

So, just how did the Red Cross advertise for blood without really using or boldly indicating the "r" word (race)? Simple. If the news report is a clue, then they just substituted the word "culture" for "race." Culture? Of course, those who aren't up on blending double-speak might have gotten confused by this and thought the Red Cross wanted blood from people who are part of Hip Hop culture or something similar, and a few wiggers might even have shown up to donate blood in order to show solidarity with their black bro. Of course, "culture" isn't really what the Red Cross meant. To make things a bit clearer, the Red Cross explained that the guy's culture is African-American. Get it? Right. They didn't say his race is African-American; it's his "culture" that is African-American. You see the subtle shift of course. "African-American" does indicate race, but it gives something of a euphemistic twist to the concept of race because Africa and America are continents, not races. "Negro blood" would have been a more descriptive term for what they wanted to get, but the term Negro plops race right out there where everyone can see it straight on, and that's not what is desired by the blenders and those who have internalized the big lie about there being no races.

Why all the verbal dancing? The blenders demand it. Clearly saying that you need blood from people of one race is the same thing as saying that race exists. This isn't what the blenders want. The blenders are trying to eradicate the whole concept of race and they're pretending it doesn't exist. Why? Because their ultimate genocidal goal is to eradicate all separate races and have all humans breed together. Some blenders hope this will wipe out the present races and replace them with a person who carries genes from all races and who thus has allegiance to no race--the Tan Everyman. All hail the Untermensch, for an under-man he will be, as he huddles under the center of the bell curve like something out of Goldilocks. "This person is too white and this one is too black. This one in the middle is just right. This person is too tall and this one is too small. This one in the middle is just right."

Another story that also came down the pike this week was about black women often being fatter than white women because many black women have a much higher level of the hunger hormone ghrelin that causes them to eat more than white women. Must be another one of those cultural things. Can't have anything to do with race or the basis of race, genes.

Then there's the well known fact that one must get bone marrow transplants from people of one's own, ah, "culture" or the bone marrow won't take. Somehow, our racist bodies know if bone marrow is from this "culture" or this other "culture" and if it's from the wrong "culture" our bodies will reject it and we'll die. You see, our evil bodies are prejudiced and bigoted and just don't like people of other colors. When we're sleeping, our evil racist bodies (if we're white) probably go out and burn crosses on nice black people's lawns. "Golly, Ward, I didn't think I was a racist," says June while crying and wringing her hands. "I go out of my way to tell people of other 'cultures' that I love them and that I hate many people of my own 'culture,' but now I hate my body because it's a racist. I think I'll have to just jump off a building to get rid of this racism that is within me. Oh, why was I ever born. I hate myself."

"Now, now," says her fatherly husband. "Why don't we just adopt a black baby instead of having any white racist children."

"Ooooh, Ward, you're the grooviest. With a black trophy baby, I can proudly push him or her around the supermarket and just stick it to those evil white racist bodies that are all around. And, having a black baby will help me expiate my original sin of being born with a white racist body. I'll prove to the world that I'm not a racist. And, when we get old and die, our black baby will bear our name and we will have wiped out our racist lines. The children are our future, Ward."

The real stinkeroo of a news story this week, however, was one about a bunch of so-called scientists who met recently and formed a consensus among themselves that race doesn't exist. One guy, Alan Goodman :rolleyes: , who is apparently the incoming president of the American Anthropological Association, said: "Culturally, I'm white-ified. People see me as white. That has something to do with how I look, but it has nothing to do with biological variation."

Huh? Biological variation has nothing to do with the way white-ified Goodman looks? Nonsense. Biological variation has everything to do with the way one looks, Mr. Goodman. That's the way it works. Biological variation made you white-ified. You were born that way. You had white-ified parents and they gave you white-ified genes. Now you have white-ified skin. You have these things and some other races don't precisely because of biological variation.

Then again, perhaps some of these white-ified so-called scientists believe that people of the, er, white-ified cultural persuasion have somehow just acquired, after they were born, cultural artifacts such as white-ified skin, certain white-ified color and texture hair, certain white-ified color eyes, certain white-ified bone and muscle structures, a certain type of white-ified blood, and millions and millions of other white-ified things that differentiate them from people who are, oh, black-ified, or brown-ified, or yellow-ified or red-ified. Perhaps some of these white-ified scientists should take their white-ified selves to the Red Cross and see if they can use their white-ified blood to help the black-ified man who needs black-ified blood. "Golly, Ward, did you see that neighbor kid, Bobby? He left the house this morning all white-ified and he came home tonight all black-ified. Goes to show you that race doesn't exist as a biological reality. The kid just changed from white-ified to black-ified. It's all cultural."

If some of these white-ified folks have dogs, one wonders if they talk in terms of breeds or whether they say things such as "I have a Boxer-ified dog or I have a Collie-ified dog."

Race does exist. It is the equivalent of breeds of dogs or other animals. Race is not a cultural construct or an illusion. It's a genetic construct and real. That's why people of different races have different medical needs and why race specific blood and bone marrow work better for race specific people. It's also the reason that police investigators can tell the "culture" of a person by DNA--a hair, a fleck of skin, a drop of saliva or other bodily fluid.

A closer read of this last news report about the so-called scientists who have reportedly decided among themselves by consensus (consensus doesn't always mean unanimous and it can mean a simple majority) that race doesn't exist, gives a clue to my white-ified brain as to why there was such a consensus. These so-called scientists were part of a National Science Foundation and Ford Foundation (look up those two foundations to see their biases) project to put together a traveling museum exhibit on race (that will, I imagine, try to prove to easily suggestible minds that race doesn't exist). In other words, many of them were probably all pretty much of like minds when they were selected.

Intelligent, conscious people see the agenda of those who want to deny the reality of race and genes and know that in these matters we can pretty much trust our senses to tell us who is us and who is not us. We have been given our senses to be in the world and to survive. We have a sense of smell. If something smells bad to us, it probably is bad for us. We have a sense of taste. If something tastes bad to us, it probably is bad for us. We have our sense of hearing. If something sounds bad to us, it probably is bad for us. We have our sense of touch. If something feels bad to us, it probably is bad for us. We have our sense of sight--usually our main early warning system--If something looks bad to us or doesn't look like us, it probably is bad for us or probably isn't like us.

Trust your senses unless you have an iron-clad reason not to trust them. White-ified people aren't the same as non-white-ified people. Your eyes tell you that. Your eyes aren't lying to you. You have your eyes to help you survive. Deny what they tell you at your own peril.

If you ever need a bone marrow transplant, you'd better pray that your doctor isn't a blender or he might try to fill you with bone marrow from someone of a different race--and you'll die--and you'd better also pray that your parents and ancestors mated with their own kind, because it's almost impossible to find matches for multi-racial people.

Spuriousmonkey:

And you fail to add that:

Although populations do cluster by broad geographic regions, which generally correspond to socially recognized races, the distribution of genetic variation is quasicontinuous in clinal patterns related to geography. The broad global pattern reflects the accumulation of genetic drift associated with a recent African origin of modern humans, followed by expansion out of Africa and across the rest of the globe.

Aka: It may not work in all instances due to migration and drift and variation within races, but because...

The emerging picture is that populations do, generally, cluster by broad geographic regions that correspond with common racial classification (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Americas).

...it works SIGNIFICANTLY and races are verified biological fact.



You are just cherry picking. The article is opposed to the notion of biological race.

conclusion of the article:
In this review, we focus on the biogeographical distribution of genetic variation and we address the question of whether