slopjockeyTracingWoodgrains launches a defense of Manifest's controversial reputation, all without betraying a basic understanding of what the word "controversial" means.
earthquakeTracingWoodgrains seems to have developed, in the process of leaving mormonism, an obsession with seeking out contrarianism. But perhaps more importantly, he openly admits to being racist/HBD “align[s] broadly with informed experts that the distribution of genetic traits associated with intelligence is non-zero”. As such, he only considers it “racism” if it’s “racial crassness and antagonism”.
In which TW names who he thinks is treating the topic with the seriousness it demands without sinking to crassness: our good good friend Cremieux.
V0ldekthe distribution of genetic traits associated with intelligence is non-zero
This doesn’t even make sense. What the fuck is a zero distribution? A probability distribution cannot be “zero” in any sensible meaning of the word. Did you mean uniform?
Also obv citation needed you sack of spuds.
I think he is trying to say something like “non-zero skew”, but really, he just means “I subscribe to race science, but only for the articles”.
I think you’re being too generous. What they wanted to say is “There are genetic traits associated with intelligence.” However, not inserting probability distributions in every fucking sentence is a class 2 misdemeanor in Rat circles, hence what was written.
There are genetic traits associated with intelligence.
Which is obviously true, since the genetic traits of BEING A HUMAN quite strongly correlate with intelligence.
There’s no way to say the quiet part without saying it out loud here!