Racism is dead right?

Umm... are you talking about Mexicans?

Because that is not an accurate description of the circumstances of Spanish-Americans, in my experience.


Well this is my observation on Mexican and Colombian in the Chicago area . I am in this area over 50 years, I have seen changes in neighborhoods, from good to bad and most of the time Mexicans have added a plus and stability to the area . I would not say the same for the Spanish people cumming from the Islands.
 
I]Homo sapiens is a pack-social species, like wolves, lions, gorillas, etc. Until the Neolithic Revolution created the first food surplus in the history of the planet, our Paleolithic ancestors hunted and gathered for survival, and they required a certain size range to provide enough food for their tribe. During a bad year, neighboring tribes would try to encroach on each other's territory, in order to satsify their hunger. This made them mortal enemies: any food taken by another tribe meant that someone in your own tribe might starve to death.

So we have an instinct to regard people outside our own gene pool as hated and feared competitors for scarce resources.

Humans have always been more complicated than that because our enormous forebrain gives us the ability to stifle instinctive behavior, and there's plenty of evidence that during good times tribes did indeed get along peacefully, trading crafts and having festivals together where they'd mix up the gene pool a little. Nonetheless, that pack-social instinct is there and during bad times it percolates right back to the top of our priorities.

The problem with civilization is that there's always something wrong so our pack-social "bad times" instinct is always fighting for dominance, and it's ridiculously easy for us to regard people who are obviously not members of our own "tribe" as hated and feared competitors.

Very good! That says it all . . . :bravo:
 
On Racism in Scientific Worth

On Racism in Scientific Worth

Rob Stein explains the situation for The Washington Post:

Black scientists are significantly less likely than white researchers to win grants from the National Institutes of Health, according to an audit released Thursday that confirmed disturbing suspicions inside the agency about a lingering bias against African Americans.

The analysis of data from more than 40,000 researchers who submitted more than 80,000 grant applications to NIH between 2000 and 2006 found that only about 16 percent of those from black applicants were approved, compared with about 29 percent of those from white scientists.

Even after the researchers accounted for other factors that could help explain the discrepancy, such as differences in scientists' education and training, black applicants were still about 10 percentage points less likely than whites to get NIH funding, the researchers reported. About 27 percent of white applicants' requests were successful, compared with only about 17 percent of blacks'.

Asians applying for money appeared to be slightly less likely than whites to get grants, but that gap disappeared when the researchers matched equally qualified white and Asian U.S. citizens. Hispanics were about as successful as whites.

The findings are troubling because they indicate that race remains a significant factor in who gets funding for research into diabetes, cancer, heart disease and other health problems from the premier funder of biomedical research, the researchers said.


(Boldface accent added)

It's a pretty heavy discrepancy, such that NIH's own eggheads were able to figure out there might be a problem. The present report is the result of a University of Kansas study stemming from a prior internal audit, in which someone apparently figured out they had one hell of an appearance of imbalance.

NIH Director Francis Collins said the "situation is not acceptable" and that the "data is deeply troubling".

Donna Ginther, the University of Kansas department director who led the study, apparently could not figure other explanations for the outcome:

Ginther and her colleagues tried several methods to explain the discrepancy, including analyzing whether differences in the topics being proposed for study by blacks or the types of studies they hoped to conduct might be playing a role, but they did not identify any clear explanation. The researchers speculated, however, that several factors could be playing a role. Black scientists, for example, might not be as plugged into professional "peer-review" networks that judge scientific proposals as white researchers. They might also tend to work at institutions that offer less support.

"I don't think it's overt racism. I'm not thinking someone is going through the applications and saying: 'Black, do not fund,'" Ginther said. "But it could be a matter of networks — that these investigators are not as well connected as others. Or it could be the resources of their home institutions in preparing the applications."


(Boldface accent added)

Collins explained: "I would like not to believe that is intentional bias, but I can't exclude, after talking to lots of colleagues, the possibility that even today in 2011 in our society there is still an unconscious, insidious form bias that subtly influences opinions of people."

It's kind of hard to say racism is dead in this country when even NIH is running out of alternative explanations for the appearance of racism.

I mean, sure, we could say it's the NIH and University of Kansas Center of Science Technology and Economic Policy, and assert that as these are public institutions they aren't being scientific, because, well, you know, they're gov'mint, and sciency, and lib'r'l.

Then again, if the sciency gov'mint lib'r'ls are tryin' to wipe out the white race, it's even more foolish to suggest that racism is dead in this country.
____________________

Notes:

Stein, Rob. "Blacks less likely than whites to get NIH grants, study finds". The Washington Post. August 18, 2011. WashingtonPost.com. August 18, 2011. http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...-study-finds/2011/08/15/gIQAJqoyNJ_story.html
 
On Racism in Scientific Worth

Black scientists are significantly less likely than white researchers to win grants from the National Institutes of Health, according to an audit released Thursday that confirmed disturbing suspicions inside the agency about a lingering bias against African Americans.

The analysis of data from more than 40,000 researchers who submitted more than 80,000 grant applications to NIH between 2000 and 2006 found that only about 16 percent of those from black applicants were approved, compared with about 29 percent of those from white scientists.

Even after the researchers accounted for other factors that could help explain the discrepancy, such as differences in scientists' education and training, black applicants were still about 10 percentage points less likely than whites to get NIH funding, the researchers reported. About 27 percent of white applicants' requests were successful, compared with only about 17 percent of blacks'.

Asians applying for money appeared to be slightly less likely than whites to get grants, but that gap disappeared when the researchers matched equally qualified white and Asian U.S. citizens. Hispanics were about as successful as whites.

The findings are troubling because they indicate that race remains a significant factor in who gets funding for research into diabetes, cancer, heart disease and other health problems from the premier funder of biomedical research, the researchers said.


(Boldface accent added)

It's a pretty heavy discrepancy, such that NIH's own eggheads were able to figure out there might be a problem. The present report is the result of a University of Kansas study stemming from a prior internal audit, in which someone apparently figured out they had one hell of an appearance of imbalance.

NIH Director Francis Collins said the "situation is not acceptable" and that the "data is deeply troubling".

Donna Ginther, the University of Kansas department director who led the study, apparently could not figure other explanations for the outcome:

Ginther and her colleagues tried several methods to explain the discrepancy, including analyzing whether differences in the topics being proposed for study by blacks or the types of studies they hoped to conduct might be playing a role, but they did not identify any clear explanation. The researchers speculated, however, that several factors could be playing a role. Black scientists, for example, might not be as plugged into professional "peer-review" networks that judge scientific proposals as white researchers. They might also tend to work at institutions that offer less support.

"I don't think it's overt racism. I'm not thinking someone is going through the applications and saying: 'Black, do not fund,'" Ginther said. "But it could be a matter of networks — that these investigators are not as well connected as others. Or it could be the resources of their home institutions in preparing the applications."


(Boldface accent added)

Collins explained: "I would like not to believe that is intentional bias, but I can't exclude, after talking to lots of colleagues, the possibility that even today in 2011 in our society there is still an unconscious, insidious form bias that subtly influences opinions of people."

It's kind of hard to say racism is dead in this country when even NIH is running out of alternative explanations for the appearance of racism.

I mean, sure, we could say it's the NIH and University of Kansas Center of Science Technology and Economic Policy, and assert that as these are public institutions they aren't being scientific, because, well, you know, they're gov'mint, and sciency, and lib'r'l.

Then again, if the sciency gov'mint lib'r'ls are tryin' to wipe out the white race, it's even more foolish to suggest that racism is dead in this country.
____________________

Notes:

Stein, Rob. "Blacks less likely than whites to get NIH grants, study finds". The Washington Post. August 18, 2011.
Do you think that if the white liberals like Donna Ginther who conducted this 'study' found the submissions of black scientists to be of inferior quality to those of other races they would mention it?

Hell, they've been conditioned to be blind to such things. This is politics interfering in science.

Perhaps the blacks that did get funding only did so BECAUSE THEY WERE BLACK. I don't see any attempt to question that in this study.
 
(Something, something, Burt Ward)

Ozymandias said:

Do you think that if the white liberals like Donna Ginther who conducted this 'study' found the submissions of black scientists to be of inferior quality to those of other races they would mention it?

Hell, they've been conditioned to be blind to such things. This is politics interfering in science.

Perhaps the blacks that did get funding only did so BECAUSE THEY WERE BLACK. I don't see any attempt to question that in this study.

Thank you for so eagerly and earnestly proving my point.

I mean, sure, we could say it's the NIH and University of Kansas Center of Science Technology and Economic Policy, and assert that as these are public institutions they aren't being scientific, because, well, you know, they're gov'mint, and sciency, and lib'r'l.​
 
I agree.

The question is when will white liberals give up trying to level the physical traits of diverging phenotypes.
 
I agree.

The question is when will white liberals give up trying to level the physical traits of diverging phenotypes.

That will occur imemdiately after racists and other conservative trolls quit confusing race with some kind of biological construct. Because they'll realize that this nonsense about "phenotypes" and other biological quantities was all in their own heads to begin with. Race is a social construct - you try to find a basis for it in the physical sciences, and the effort just falls apart.
 
(Insert Title Here)

Ozymandias said:

The question is when will white liberals give up trying to level the physical traits of diverging phenotypes.

A very telling question, indeed.
 
Race is a social construct - you try to find a basis for it in the physical sciences, and the effort just falls apart.[/QUOTE]


Let say you have 3 persons naked which are black, white and asian and you don't have their name and you want to talk to one if the 3 then you ask me to bring one of them to you ,how would you identify the person . How would you describe each.
 
Race is a social construct - you try to find a basis for it in the physical sciences, and the effort just falls apart.


Let say you have 3 persons naked which are black, white and asian and you don't have their name and you want to talk to one if the 3 then you ask me to bring one of them to you ,how would you identify the person . How would you describe each.[/QUOTE]

Is there any women in the group . That might make a difference in they way I call them . I might say bring that red headed girl over here cause I got something to tell her in her Lillie pink ear. Bring that snow flake a little closer would yeah . I got some candy , Some syrup to go on your snow cone . O.K. that is how I describe a pale skin red head . Now the next one would go loke this . Holy fuck who is that beautiful Nubian princess , you got to bring that girl just a little closer so I can gaze that those big brown eyes . Maybe just close enough those lips of hers can touch mine .
I got to think about the Asian girl cause I am kind of shy around her dark hair silky smooth , with her silky smooth skin . I dream about what she has hiding under her close . You will definitely need to bring her a little closer so I can breath me hot breath on the side of her neck . See if we can raise a goose bump on her skin. What can I say I am a man with carnal desire . An Animal with animal instinct. Desire ! Desire! Pull you pants down

O.K.O.K. I got a racial joke. I better not tell it . My Daughter she was way into restitution of the disenfranchised and would come unglued if some on called an Asian Oriental , being oriental is a rug not a person . Now you can call a China Persons Chinese cause there from China , but don't ever call a Korean Japanese or Chinese. Asian is the blanket term for nationalities native to that part of the world . So it is Thanksgiving and Me daughter is hot and heavy on affirmative action . Most the people are not engaged in the conversation except 4 or 5 of us ( Thanks Giving at me mothers was the stuff . You never new who would be there . Big personalities yes indeed . 40 to 50 people for Thanks giving , People from all over the world ) So anyway we finish the discussion and go sit in the living room in front of the massive fire place roaring with a hot fire and Me cousin Dean( The Red Head hellion you don't tango with ) tells this racial joke . I am sitting there next to my Daughter and I start to feel the swell . I am saying to my self " it is not funny don't laugh , no not funny don't laugh and all of a sudden I just start spitting and my lips start wiggling and noises start coming out my mouth until I am in full roaring historical laughter like a a church goer at a Pentecostal church that just got filled with the spirit and was talking in tongues . Oh shit me Daughter got up and walked away with discuss as she threw her arms up and then to her side . Oh Fuck Me stepped in it big. It was that Red Headed Deans fault . He will get you in trouble every time
 
On Racism in Scientific Worth



Black scientists are significantly less likely than white researchers to win grants from the National Institutes of Health, according to an audit released Thursday that confirmed disturbing suspicions inside the agency about a lingering bias against African Americans.

That seems a lot of BS.

When black scientist apply for a grant do they identify them self that they are black. Or they specify as the project they want to work on.


]
 
That will occur imemdiately after racists and other conservative trolls quit confusing race with some kind of biological construct. Because they'll realize that this nonsense about "phenotypes" and other biological quantities was all in their own heads to begin with. Race is a social construct - you try to find a basis for it in the physical sciences, and the effort just falls apart.
So the difference between a greyhound and a cocker spaniel is only a matter of social perception?

What's entertaining here is the desperate need to deny physical reality and the anxiety it causes the liberal mind and how it clings to social safety nets and rejects objective reality as the work of evil, prejudiced minds.

A childish perspective - but one common to many religions - and unfortunately one which has been nurtured in the West over the last century under the banner of secular liberalism.
 
Last edited:
More on NIH Grants

NIH Considers Its Past, Present, and Future

Francis Collins and Lawrence Tabak of the National Institutes of Health lay out the problem and consider initiatives toward solutions in Science magazine:

As much as the U.S. scientific community may wish to view itself as a single garment of many diverse and colorful threads, an unflinching consideration of actual data reminds us that our nation's biomedical research workforce remains nowhere near as rich as it could be. An analysis, performed by a team of researchers primarily supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and published in this issue of Science, reveals that from 2000 to 2006, black grant applicants were significantly less likely to receive NIH research funding than were white applicants. The gap in success rates amounted to 10 percentage points, even after controlling for education, country of origin, training, employer characteristics, previous research awards, and publication record. Their analysis also showed a gap of 4.2 percentage points for Asians; however, the differences between Asian and white award probabilities were explained by exclusion of noncitizens from the analysis.

There are several possible explanations for these troubling data, and they are not mutually exclusive. The authors propose a contribution of “cumulative advantage” from experiences of majority applicants that are not equivalently enjoyed by black applicants; potentially, this cumulative difference could reflect the long reach of earlier educational experiences in kindergarten through grade 12 and college training. A related possibility is variability in access to mentoring and other resources.

But as uncomfortable as it makes us, we must acknowledge that the differences observed may reflect biases that are insidiously interwoven into the basic fabric of the merit/reward system of science. The well-described “Matthew effect” in science points to disproportional credit being accorded to “elite” scientists. A broader generalization of this phenomenon may operate in our scientific culture to enhance careers of successful white scientists but diminish recognition of the contributions of others. The observations of Ginther et al. suggest the presence of an “inverse Matthew effect,” that is, residual cultural biases may have disproportionate adverse consequences on minority subgroups of our scientific community.


(Boldface accent added)

Meanwhile, the same issue of the magazine also presents the study by Ginther et al.
____________________

Notes:

Tabek, Lawrence A. and Francis S. Collins. "Weaving a Richer Tapestry in Biomedical Science". Science, v.333. August 19, 2011. ScienceMag.org. August 20, 2011. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6045/940.full

Ginther, Donna K. et al. "Race, Ethnicity, and NIH Research Awards". Science, v.333. August 19, 2011. ScienceMag.org. August 20, 2011. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6045/1015.full.pdf
 
So the difference between a greyhound and a cocker spaniel is only a matter of social perception?
The genetic difference between two breeds of dogs is, in most cases, enormously greater than between any two human beings. The genes of a man from Borneo, a man from Ghana, and a man from Iceland are almost identical, compared to the difference between the genes of a greyhound, a Pekinese and a cocker spaniel.

Our species has a very narrow gene pool compared to dogs.
What's entertaining here is the desperate need to deny physical reality and the anxiety it causes the liberal mind and how it clings to social safety nets and rejects objective reality as the work of evil, prejudiced minds.
What's entertaining is the importance that some people place on differences in physical appearance, which are manifestations of exceedingly minor genetic differences, and their determination to imply that those exceedingly minor differences also affect more important traits such as character, which, unlike physical appearance, are clearly influenced heavily by environment and upbringing.
A childish perspective - but one common to many religions - and unfortunately one which has been nurtured in the West over the last century under the banner of secular liberalism.
I always suspected that you live on a different planet, and this proves it.

Christianity and Islam, which together account for almost half of the human population, have been major forces for the persistence of racism.

Notwithstanding that long-term trend, over the last century the religious left in America and Europe has been just as powerful a force for the eradication of racists like you as the secular left. Even as far back as 1748, when slavery was being institutionalized in the New World, French political theorist Montesquieu snidely observed: “It is impossible for us to suppose these creatures to be men; because allowing them to be men, a suspicion would follow that we ourselves are not Christians.”
 
Christianity and Islam, which together account for almost half of the human population, have been major forces for the persistence of racism.


Are you sure of whAT you posted ,specially about Christianity . Have you researched on what the church in the North USA did for the slavery?

Who were the people who captured black man in wesr Africa to sell them to the traders.

Notwithstanding that long-term trend, over the last century the religious left in America and Europe has been just as powerful a force for the eradication of racists like you as the secular left. Even as far back as 1748, when slavery was being institutionalized in the New World,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
Asians applying for money appeared to be slightly less likely than whites to get grants, but that gap disappeared when the researchers matched equally qualified white and Asian U.S. citizens. Hispanics were about as successful as whites.

The findings are troubling because they indicate that race remains a significant factor

i could never understand this line of argument. how can race be a factor in this case when Asian U.S citizens and Hispanics are just as successful as whites? of course citizens will have priority over non-citizens.

there is one question i keep asking people over and over but no one has been able to give me an answer. what reasons do whites have to be racist against blacks but not Asians?

Chinese railroad and goldmine workers, Japanese, Filipino plantation workers, skilled immigrants from the Philippines and Korea have all been given jobs. why is it that whites keep giving jobs to the Asians but they just won't give the black man a job? don't you think the problem is with blacks and not whites when it comes to job and funding opportunities?:shrug::confused:
 
i could never understand this line of argument. how can race be a factor in this case when Asian U.S citizens and Hispanics are just as successful as whites? of course citizens will have priority over non-citizens.

there is one question i keep asking people over and over but no one has been able to give me an answer. what reasons do whites have to be racist against blacks but not Asians?

Chinese railroad and goldmine workers, Japanese, Filipino plantation workers, skilled immigrants from the Philippines and Korea have all been given jobs. why is it that whites keep giving jobs to the Asians but they just won't give the black man a job? don't you think the problem is with blacks and not whites when it comes to job and funding opportunities?:shrug::confused:

those peoples were exploited in the most nasty ways . So were the Irish . The reason know all so well is My family exploited there labor . Lloyd Tevis and his partners did there part in the copper minds of north America. They are called the copper kings in history. Give a job takes on a new meaning when you explore the hardships the people endured to build the wealth of a select few . How long does it take to crawl out of a hole 10 feet deep if the sides have cut banks . I think maybe you sould be a picker for a couple os seasons and get a taste of what you are saying . Maybe you are a picker ?

A nose picker possible . I think maybe not a fruit picker . So is that opportunity you talking about . Educated university graduates becoming railroad workers, pickers and gold miners . Great . I got a shovel . Lets get going . I know the spot . It is a little of a hike . 25 maybe 30 miles in the wilderness and we will have to watch out for fish and game ( they do carry guns , so think about bring yours too ) Pistols if you handle one are preferable . Rifles get kind of awkward when hiking out the gold


What makes you think ! White people are not prejudices towards Asians and Hispanic peoples . When did that change . Was I taking a nap when it happened . White people have a superiority complex . I know ! Cause I suffer from the same ailment . Except mine is all peoples . It is my God delusion . Super Man delusions of grandeur. It is my way of over compensating for being called a loser. Not that that many people have the nerve to say it to my face , but when they say it to someone who I identify with it feels just like they did
 
Last edited:
Back
Top