Thread: Scientific Proof That Blacks Are More Violent/Aggressive/Savage

Originally Posted by Zook

What color are the skies on your planet? Pink?

I suggest you meet some black "people" in person to educate yourself on reality. And don't tell us you have already because it's clear from all your posts you're a novice on racial issues.

You live under the same delusions that Germany suffered from when it succumbed to the lies of Hitler and his minions. That is only too obvious.

I'm sensing a Tookie Moment ...

Load of (*)(*)(*)(*)ing hogwash.

Is the "warrior gene" more predominant in blacks? Yes, according to at least one researcher.
But according to the same researcher, it is even more prevalent in the Chinese.

This is why racists shouldn't do "science". They make presumptions that aren't supported by any form of empirical data.

IRANIANS SHOULD NOT DO Science , but Jews are OK wit it...

Here are some problems I have with your post.

1. The sample size of the study that showed that 14% of African-Americans have the allele was exceedingly small. 37 people? That is a terrible sample size. A drug company testing a drug on only 37 people would be laughed at.

2. Do the MAOA alleles appear in Africans with the same frequency as African-Americans? What is the frequency in other races like Asian?

3. I would have concluded that you actually believed this if it wasn't for the fact that you don't think that 14% of African-Americans are violent criminals, you think most are.

Originally Posted by Zook

You're forgetting. I didn't say ALL black "people" are no good. I just don't want to be around them because most are no good and I would rather not take the chance anymore.

Originally Posted by Gator Monroe

IRANIANS SHOULD NOT DO Science , but Jews are OK wit it...

Not only one problem of the Iran is able to be solved with nuclear weapons. If you like to be a scientists then try to think from the result to the beginning. What do you think would nucelar weapons do with Persia?

The Iran never would be able to attack any country with nuclear weapons if the Iran had nucaler weapons. The USA, Russia, China and others had to destroy the Iran in this case - and because of the gigantic risk for the survival of all mankind we all had to do this very fast and very efficiently - what could mean that the Iran would be a nuclear hell after this hard and cruel attack of defense without any chance to find any identity again.

So: With nuclear weapons the Iran would not be in a better position in communication with any other nation and foreign culture in this world. Because it helps the Iran absolutelly nothing in the international relationships - so why are the governing "elites" of the Iran interested in unislamic nuclear weapon? Answer: This wrong "elites" like to have nuclear weapons because in case the government of the Iran is slaughtering the own people no one could help this people without taking the risk of a nuclear war - and this risk is always to high even if the whole population of the Iran woud be slaughtered. The mad iranian government and the "elites" of this mad political system could slaughter everyone in their own country and no one would be able to help.

http://youtu.be/xnbiRDNaDeo

So i spent 20 minutes googling this topic. My impression as I was reading this idiocy was, "There might be a corollary relationship, but certainly no causal relationship is proven."

I suspected early that there were some unethical scientific practices going on, only to have it confirmed with this:

"Its presence might predispose towards such behaviour but only in the context of a disadvantageous environment. To make the causal claim on the evidence of association alone is naïve. In this case, the naïvety is masked by the positive public stereotype of the cutting edge scientist reporting a breakthrough."

http://journal.nzma.org.nz/journal/120-1250/2439/

Then to top it all off the source blog cross referenced ITSELF to poorly analyze another study:

Source: "One study wrote that 6% of their non-white (but probably mostly African-American) male subjects had this allele."

Cross Reference: "http://theunsilencedscience.blogspot. com/2010/01/deus-ex-machina-genetics.html"

Original Study: "http://www.bnl.gov/medical/personnel/rita-goldstein/files/Fowler_BiolPsych07.pdf" Which is based on a study of only 38 subjects, 9 of which are classified as 'African American"

Basically this is an exercise in Quackery, which anyone with half a brain and no agenda can figure out on their own without a poorly researched blog.

Originally Posted by Zook

http://theunsilencedscience.blogspot...lent-gene.html

In all seriousness, no one WANTS to hate anyone. No one chooses to be racist because it's fun or because there's something wrong with that person. Racists exist because we are disgusted by certain behavioral traits that are common within said race. These certain behavioral traits are a fact no matter how much ignorant anti-racists want to pretend otherwise. As a proud racist, I can vouch that my views exist because I am literally and utterly disgusted by uncivilized, violent, bad attidudes and actions. It has nothing to do with disliking a certain skin color or anything else simplistic like that.

Here's the thing, I believe what was discovered by that study in the link is actually curable. Medical treatment in the form of medicine that black "people" should have to take in order to control their natural, genetic, inferiorities. If a cure was developed and black "people" could join the rest of the human races as a civilized entity, then I am 100% certain racism would decrease to the point that it'd no longer be an issue within society. Because they wouldn't be acting like violent, sociopathic, subhumans intent on destroying civilization worldwide.

Which begs the question, why aren't scientists announcing this new discovery to the mainstream media and to the whole world in an attempt to create a cure to fix a problem (racism) that so many millions of bleeding heart liberals have their panties in a bunch about?

That's just a blog, a biased blog. If I, a Black man, am inherently more violent, then why do I avoid violent situations?

Originally Posted by saturn

That's just a blog, a biased blog. If I, a Black man, am inherently more violent, then why do I avoid violent situations?

are you short?

Originally Posted by MisLed

are you short?

Figuratively or literally?