View Single Post
Old 02-24-2009, 07:24 PM   #48
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker View Post
Mod Note:You'll need to quote the place I stated this, publicly retract this racist accusation, or receive an infraction. Being a fair person and a lenient moderator, I'll allow you the opportunity of 24 hours to PM me, edit your post, or retract your accusation unless you are able to quote, word-for-word where I've implied that the people of one ancestry are more or less intelligent than another. Hopefully, if an infraction is applied, you don't have enough points to auto-ban.
I'm guessing you misinterpretted what I said, and I'm sorry for not wording it in a way that you wouldn't jump to that conclusion, but for the record I never called you a racist if you actually read what I said, I was comparing the research you were using to past instances where people came up with research to justify their personal prejudgices (sp?). I stated that by your reasoning then, that research done in the 1800s would be valid as well. In other words by using that line of reasoning you can come up with that research (which you and I both know is a bunch of garbage) as being accurate.

To sum it up my point is that you need to look at historical instances of where the scientific community tried to manipulate data to promote stereotypes. To be completely blunt, I was not accusing you of being a racist, I was pointing out that your line of reasoning was faulty because by using that line of reasoning one could justify the results of those experiments seen in the 1800s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
Sorry, but you don't get to just make a baseless accusation of fallacy. You'll actually have to demonstrate it. If you'll look through your various posts and notice the appeals to authority, arguments from ignorance, and the straw man and red herring arguments you've presented, you can see examples of fallacious argumentation.
The fact that the research is highly subjective and that we have no information as to who they tested and the geographic locations where the samples were taken. This indicates the research was quite likely biased and the sample was taken in a manner to skew the results. Further based on what I've shown, it seems that research professionals that believe in God, probably aren't willing to admit it due to fear of religious discrimination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
Just because you disagree or don't want what I'm saying to be true doesn't give you reason to say "it goes both ways," because it doesn't. If, however, you can specify which of my arguments and assertions were fallacious, cite the type of fallacy and why you think a fallacy exists, then I'll need to revise my position or change it. Or, counter argue why the reasoning is sound. None of this, by the way, have you done as your fallacies have been pointed out. This is indicative of poor reasoning or at least a refusal to acknowledge reason and evidence of the assertion that there is a negative correlation between cognitive ability and conservative beliefs.
There is such a thing as common sense, tests that say that people with a certain beliefs aren't as intelligent as others for instance doesn't pass the smell test. You can tell right off that the researcher had an ax to grind. Whenever you have research that says someone of a particular religion, race, etc. isn't going to be as intelligent as another individual for those reasons, then you can tell that the research is probably not accurate.

I am glad you at least waited for me to clarrify what I was saying in case you were misinterpreting what I was saying.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,