Grunty <gruntingdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On 15 mar, 23:49, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Grunty <gruntingdw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >On 15 mar, 11:51, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >> It's all in your subhuman racist mind.
>>
>> >> There are no "whites".
>>
>> >> We are all mongrels.
>>
>> >We are all born in Africa, probably "cafe au lait." But then we
>> >differentiated and here we are now.
>>
>> So you ASSume.
>
>If you think you're right and I'm wrong, then I don't see the need to
>be insultant.
I insult all racists who post on the education newsgroups. Its one of
my pleasant leisure activities.
>The fact is that we did differentiate, like it or not. It takes a
>daltonic to deny that.
>Now and long since, there existed people with black skin and people
>with light skin. Such groups are called races.
There is one human race. Over the course of history, people have
chosen to divide themselves up in various ways for social purposes.
The "races" of the Nazis and the white supremicists are their
particular social divisions.
Most cultures do not divide people up socially based on skin color.
It's really a rather silly basis for doing so.
>Each race has been long since roughly assigned their range of
>latitudes - in fact, races aren't but specializations to the different
>environments. It isn't unreasonable to suppose that the geographical
>distribution may have, in the early ages, induced differences in
>abilities.
It is quite unreasonable.
Some populations will have different frequencies of certain traits,
but it is pretty unlikely that anything but the simplest traits would
be widespread in the short time frame we are talking about,
evolutionarily speaking, unless there was a specific basis that NOT
having that trait seriously impedes survival.
"Intelligence" is not such a trait.
lojbab
|
