But the damage has been done. I doubt you now have much power to either make people forget about the genetic evidence OR make people think you gave them a fair balance of the issues. Your apology isn't very useful.
And the entire title of the piece "Created Equal." Well, what about for an atheist who thinks that humans aren't special creations of a loving God, but rather selfish genes that randomly evolved tailored to their unique environments 100,000 years ago. How can we believe that they were all created equal when the exact quality that we use to distinguish ourselves from animals (and say we're better than them): intelligence, shows huge disparities between the races
Oh well. Honestly, anyone who knows anything about these HBD guys know that they have shady backgrounds. After all, it's only people without much credibility that DON'T have anything to LOSE by talking about this stuff. Watson had credibility, he spoke, and got fried. After seeing that, are you surprised that the only people who have treaded on this territory in the past have been intellectual outcasts?
It's unfortunate that serious science can't take place because no one wants to venture there. So, we have to rely on the Rushtons, Lynns, and Jensens(who is actually well respected).
An odd world we live in.
After all, John McCain just said we're winning in Iraq, Mitt Romney said the failure of black education is a civil rights tragedy (while torture is acceptable), Mike Huckabee thinks Jesus was too smart to run for public office, Tom Tancredo thinks NASA is responsible for our deficits, Ron Paul raised a ton of money from military personnel after advocating Iraq withdrawal, Guiliani agonized over the veracity of the bible, and a former actor with no original ideas has a shot at the presidency.
If only Hillary Clinton had a chance to defend herself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Please consider contributing on the 16th of December.
Ron Paul needs the publicity of another big fund raising day.
I’m a veteran of the U.S. Air Force active duty (4yrs) and I currently serve as a traditional guardsman in the Air National Guard. All military personnel upon enlistment take the oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” A vote for Rep. Paul does just that. Ron Paul has my support.
There is an obvious media bias and it is sad. Rep. Paul is the one candidate of the crowd who has substantially differing views and he was not given much of a chance to articulate those views. Much time was given to marginal issues and small differences between other candidates’ positions on the issues. I suspect many special interest groups have much to lose if a President Paul had a chance to use his veto pen. This is reflected in the lack of time given to Rep. Paul.
Post a Comment