Wikipedia Article Promotes Racial Inferiority of Non Whites

Just when you thought you could turn your head and look away from the stupidity, neo-Nazi and white supremacist attitudes and beliefs again rear their ugly heads — this time on Wikipedia. If you go to Wikipedia, do me a favor and search for race and Intelligence and you will see what I mean. The article you find there will be up at least until September 1, 2010.

The article attempts to apply a rational justification — albeit non-empirically or scientifically based — that blacks are genetically inferior to whites in general and especially with respect to intelligence. It incorporates the findings that recently manifested when The Journal of Psychology, Public Policy and Law, published an article by J.P. Rushton and A.R. Jensen called “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability and the recent book by Ricard Nisbett, Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count.

These individuals, in concert with the classic premise of racial inferiority as postulated by Freud, Jung, Sir Francis Galton and others, postulate the heritability of intelligence as a perceived genetic disposition is greatest among white populations. Moreover, it asserts that as a function, test scores, specifically IQ differences are a function of genetic inheritability as well. The article, which claims to be sound research, even states that “Brain size is correlated to IQ and blacks have smaller brains than whites.” This has never been scientifically documented from an anatomical or physiological locution.

In the past I have informed many that Google and Wikipedia are not references and should not be used as such. In fact they actually may do more harm than good, seeing they allowed a single man to propose a feculent theory regarding the genetic impact of race on intelligence when science indicates that race is fictitious and completely man-made.

As a scientist in the field of behavior, I attempted to correct and argue the factual historical and scientific authenticity and negate the fallacious assertions presented in this article, but I cannot edit it since it is being disputed for its factual accuracy and incessant systemic bias presented. We should all read this, even if it just to show you what Africans in the world are up against, or how little you actually know.

when sequence was a dress

Addendum. Was nominated by Blackpolitics on the web for a Shiningstar award. Good look - but folk here Libertarian not Liberal Jones.

Back in the day one would hear the word sequence and you would think about them little bitty azz circles with a hole in the middle that would be stitched together on a blouse, skirt or dress. Namely for women. I learned actually what this was, although I had seen them on clothes worn by my mom and granny, when I played the drums in the high school band because our majorettes (fine as they wanted to be) wore outfits made of them small circle things with the holes in the middle.

Not anymore, at least since Geneticists of Leiden University Medical Center have become the first folk to determine the DNA sequence of a woman. They say this was easier to perform on a woman since women do not typically have a Y-chromosome, but rather two X-chromosomes. Marjolein Kriek, a clinical geneticist working at the institute, is the first woman to have her genome sequenced, according to the University. They say it took them about six months to produce approximately 22 gigabases of sequence data of lil momma.

I wanted to write this a while back since it happened in May because I wanted to see if I could verify if the findings confirmed Ohno's theory which estimated that the human genome must contain up to 100,000 distinct genes, since Human Genome Project found that humans today have only 20,000 to 25,000 genes. But I couldn’t. But over all this has some far reaching implications. For one, if I were a geneticist, I would be making loot, charging the supre rich 200 stacks to have their genes sequenced. Then again maybe not, for a mind such as mind may find the fck boy gene, the bad breath gene, the liar gene or the lazy gene. And I don’t need to give folks who have historically, like Carl Jung (who equated Africans to Gorillas and that "Living together with barbaric [lower] races [especially with Negroes] exerts a suggestive effect on the laboriously tamed instinct of the white race and tends to pull it down.") or Sir Francis Galton (the father of white supremacy in the form of eugenics) or even Darwin, any more ammunitions to berate and reduce people of Africa to the status of secondary organisms.

Even worse, they may be folk unlike me that may use this technology and information to play God and in the long run, represent the final step to engendering man made life – as skin stem cells. Any who, I thought it was interesting, and now sequence for me, no longer refers to the tine circles with holes in the middle stitched on dresses or skirts.

Beauty but No Substance

For those of you who read my blog on the regular, you should have learned a few things about me. First is that my family comes first. Also, that I am an old school Memphis Mac, I love writing and making music, women, got an IQ way over 150, that I’m working with a lot of something (u make the call) and that I am a simple country boy. This past week I was in Bethesda making a presentation to the National Institutes of Health on my infectious disease prevention work in prisons in South Africa. I was there with about 25 or so other scientist from around the world who are doing work in the country and were also funded by NIH.

One of the people there gave a presentation on their work, which was also on correctional populations. His slides were beautiful, the colors were vivid and his statistical presentation of the data seemed appropriate. However, when he neared the end of his presentation, he concluded, “participants with low levels of impulse control were six times more likely to be incarcerated and therefore, impulse control is a major factor in incarceration.” Me being a supposed expert in the area, and concerned regarding his implication that mental deficits account for incarceration more than any other factor, asked him a question at the end of his presentation: “Did you discern how much of the variation in self reported impulse control was a function of education, or race, or proximity to living in urban areas given increased penalty enhancements for conducting a criminal act in a drug free zone for example?”

His answer was “No.”

“Well how can you assert such? Doing such is almost Sir Francis Galton like.”

I was told by my grandmother and have heard other say that “Beauty is only skin deep.” Meaning that what is on the surface is not important, but rather what is on the inside. It is what is on the inside that makes one beautiful. It is what is inside that reflects integrity, responsibility, commitment, value respect and passion. Moreover, it is what is inside that makes one reflect such in acts of kindness and positive unconditional regard to others. Otherwise, one can be the most attractive or beautiful person in looks and external features but uglier than a motherfucker on the inside and reflect such in the way they treat people.

I am glad I had the chance to ask him about his presentation. For if I did not, people would have just said how great it was and how good it looked, and how well put together it was. His findings were useless without the substance attached to plausible explination. Underneath it all, it was ugly for he tried to assert that factors related to ones mental state were the most significant variables of all when it comes to individuals being incarcerated. Again, I say, beauty is only skin-deep; it is what is on the inside that counts, which means beauty is nothing and pointless without substance.