Tyson banned from England

It makes a difference because you are using the information to form a correlation. Its you who is destroying your own argument. I am not forcing you to do it. look to yourself for your faults. Its not me who is correlating for you, so theres no need for you to lose your temper with me.

 

So what would be the end result in you discovering what causes this correlation? What weight would it bare in the real world? Nothing.
Because at the end of the day they still possess it in larger quantities than any other race, and that's all that was crucial to the argument.
And stop trying to nit pick certain aspects of my argument while trying to capitalize on certain parts you think you could respond to which would make it appear
as if though you have the upper hand in this debate, because it is quite clear that is not the case.

 

You still haven’t answered this…

Yes, I agree on that. The socioeconomic factors are responsible for their higher tendencies towards violence. However, I think the same applies to non-whites.

That’s not true! If you study natural sciences/engineering/medicine/… how is there any Marxist influence on the students? Theories of social systems are not in the slightest part of the curriculum. In addition, countries are always governed by their elite. How is it possible for the USA to be probably the most capitalistic country on earth if all the politicians were „indoctrinated“ into Marxism? That doesn’t make sense whatsoever!
Moreover, do you really think the most uneducated people who never went to high school/college/university are the ones with the least biased and most neutral perspective on things?
Did the thought ever cross your mind that higher education also leads to a broader spectrum of knowledge which helps to prevent jumping to conclusions?

You still don’t get it! According to your logic alcohol causes lung cancer, being tall causes a higher salary, nicotine causes you to be less intelligent, being liberal causes you to be more intelligent than being a republican. In all those examples correlation was equalled with causation. Is it really so hard to comprehend? Your way of thinking is wrong!


Just out of pure curiosity, do you think stormfront is a mainly neutral and fact-based website?

 

Socioeconomic standards can be related to an increase, or decrease of violence. I agree with that; as I also agree that it also extends in the case of non-whites. I just asserted that blacks are more likely to be violent based on their genetic makeup. I also believe blacks are destitute because their inherent lack of intelligence (genetics). These are the root causes.

Marxist influence doesn't just come when one attends university level education. The Jew led Marxist influence is ubiquitous. We are inundated by it in every aspect of life. From our television, kindergarten, high school and so on and so forth. The U.S. is slowly but surely falling under the guise of socialism.

As far as the whole correlation drivel; the reason that they have the gene might be due to a multitude of genetic anomalies not yet uncovered. But the fact of the
matter is that they do have have it in higher numbers, statistics prove this. Poor white people would not even commit half the violent crimes blacks do. Regardless
of their economic foundations. I bet you a pretty penny that if there were two people, one being white and the other being black, who were confined to similar social standings, with an equal access to monetary resources (or lack of thereof) the black one would be the one to be incarcerated for violent related crimes.

The central point of my thesis is that blacks are more likely to engage in violent behaviors than whites. This is irrefutable. Any quantifiable statistic on this matter
veers towards proving my point regardless of lack of money, education, stable nuclear family basis, ect. They are still more likely to lash out in an aggressive fashion than their white counterparts.

 

Why is it that the far right is on such a meteoric rise all over Europe? Why are Anti-Semetic parties like Golden Dawn, Jobbik, EDL (Zionist lackeys but the followers aren't conscientious of the underlying issues at hand) gaining so much traction in the political scene? They can't all be wrong? Why did Nazism arise in the Wiemar Republic elect Hitler as chancellor of Germany regardless of his views on the Jewish race?

Most of the viewpoints espoused by Stormfront members is very congruent to the fascistic tenets of the political parties I've mention in the above paragraph (except Jobbik, which has revealed itself to be a pro Islam group)?

I hope you aren't so close minded that you can't see these problems from the perspective of others.

 

I don't know the studies, and obviously environment plays a big part, and yes its a big generalisation based on averages but I hate PCness that gets in the way of the truth. Black people will brag about having bigger dicks, which is true, on average they do, but I believe that white and asian people also have bigger brains and higher IQ, which on average is true.

Like I said I don't know the studies but putting political correctness aside, its not that inconceivable to believe that certain ethnicities would have a genetic makeup more inclined towards a certain behaviour, good or bad.

Also correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't different dog breeds pretty much the equivalent of different human ethnicities? The difference being the former is artificial selection, the latter natural selection, although you could argue that slavery was a form of artificial selection. Now different breeds would show different traits, I'm guessing different ethnicities would show the same as after all that group develops those traits to adapt to their surrounding.

Honestly though, when it comes to behaviour, 99% environment is responsible. The pitbull is apparently the most aggressive but pit it up against a poodle but the poodle raised in an environment that encourages violence, the pitbull the opposite and pretty sure the poodle shows a lot more aggression.

 

In regard to the genetic issue, I think it doesn’t make any sense to keep talking about it since you refuse to acknowledge basic rules of scientific working. You just skip certain points (such as the example of serotonin, depression and the MAOA gene) that don’t suit your agenda.
Concerning the Jewish influence, I can’t say much about it because I haven’t consciously witnessed it and I am not aware of what it is supposed to comprise. If you are referring to the notion that everyone is equal and should be treated accordingly, I can comfort you, the majority of the western world thinks so. To claim that Jews had to promote this kind of thinking would imply that white non-Jewish people are per se more prone to tribalistic behaviour. This would cast a bad shadow on whites as a whole, that can’t be your intention.
Furthermore, go and start studying at a university and get an idea of how it really is. Don’t solely rely on dubious people on even more dubious websites. I can assure you the kind of indoctrination you described doesn’t occur.
I know all those conspiracy theories are quite appealing if you are young but later in life you are going to find out that your basic approach of stereotypical thinking is a vastly biased and oversimplified view of the world, mainly used by simpleminded or desperate people.

They can’t all be wrong? The majority of the western world doesn’t approve of these movements. THEY can’t all be wrong!
The reason for the present increase in racist parties is simple. Nationalist politics have always recorded considerable gains during economic uncertain times. The golden dawn party rose in the country which was hit the hardest during the Euro crisis. They still have very high rates of unemployment and they don’t see much perspective. The rest of Europe demands big savings to offer further credits. They also accuse them of being lazy and unable to handle the budgetary planning. The only unalienable value people have when they have lost nearly everything is their ethnicity. So of course some Greeks are going to pride themselves on that and vote for the golden dawn party. This party turns the tables and blames Western Europe to have caused the Greek’s misery and also angles for votes by opposing the austerity plans. Populist parties are always able to thrill certain people. Watch the crisis go by and the approval rate of the golden dawn party will drop. It’s just a matter of time.
It was exactly the same mechanism that helped Hitler gain popularity and become chancellor of Germany. After the first world war Germany was imposed a multitude of sanctions, among others moral discrimination, war reparations, cession of land and a few other things. So they were mentally in an even worse state as Greece is right now. So of course they would rely on politics that re-establish their sense of nationality and restore their national self-confidence.
Now Germany is well off and consequently the fascistic party there is in a big crisis.
And so the circle closes, the kind of campaigning right wing extremist do mainly attracts uneducated people that don’t understand the economy or the social situation and its role. They just look for the easiest answer. Moreover, not just during a crisis, people with less education have a higher propensity towards poverty and seek for relief that these populist parties promise.

 

Why would harboring a tribalistic mindset be a negative thing? All the other races flaunt this trait?

Sweden, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Greece, Ukraine, Slovakia, Russia, ect. are all countries that have been seen a stiff rise in far right movements.
All these countries have been 'culturally enriched' by the Zionist social engineers. You don't think the astronomical ****, murder, theft, assault, arson, and
whatever pseudonym you choose to anoint a reprehensible crime, has nothing to do with the rise in these movements? Like stated in my previous posts, these
third world people are a burden to society. They feed off of the welfare system like parasites. It happens here in America, and it sure as hell happens in my
motherland of Europe. You don't think that has anything to do with it? Don't be so naive to mistakenly believe that it is only economic strife which instigates
the rise of any nationalistic movement. Some people wish to preserve their cultural, and racial lineage without fear of social, and political stigmatization.

And no I do not think all races were created equally. I think whites (all sub-races), and northeast Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans) are superior.
They don't have favorable traits that just extend to intellectual thinking, but athletically as well.

 

In the end you got stuck in your way of thinking and are intentionally overlooking certain points I made and refuse to react to them. If that's your way of behaving superior, go ahead and keep your flawed reasoning.

 

an argument based on a correlation is weightless. We'd still be stuck in the Dark Ages, literally, if we didn't apply scientific tests to each correlation we make. Perhaps this is were you are in spirit.

what part of 'you are basing your view on a correlation' do you not understand?

 

I've listed several other correlations that are known to not equate to causation but he simply ignores them.

 

perhaps he thinks he is on stormangrybald40somethingfront.... that place is a hive of thickkery.

 

See what you two idiot are truly not comprehending is that what I'm talking about is not a correlation. IT IS THE CAUSATION! Just because you choose to cite it
as a correlation doesn't mean it is so. It's just a misplaced opinion. I said the reason blacks are more prone to violence is because of genetic factors embedded deep within them. Genetic factors such as low IQ, high testosterone, low impulse control, higher propensity of the MAOA gene, ect. This is not a correlation in
respect to my argument. This is the causation.

If this isn't the causation then please elaborate on what really is the root causation of their violent outbursts.

Do not cite social inequalities as the main stance of your argument because then you are just asking to get flamed.

 

Those correlations are external causes, not genetically internal?

 

I'm not claiming to know anything, nor have I observed what you claim to see. Its you making the claim and such observations.

If this proves causation, what was your null hypothesis and comparison test group?

If you are claiming causation without that then you are truely a fruitloop stringing together random factors.