That is an ignorant opinion, inconsistent with the facts, and which requires large amounts of cherry picking and BS reasoning to support.

Argument from popularity? Seriously?

So many fallacies and BS rhetorical techniques, all in one place!

So much good comedy (intentional and especially the unintentional) in one thread.

I absolutely agree. It never makes sense to me when people bring up party politics from decades ago as if this has any bearing on the values or wisdom of the current parties platforms. Most of the political parties throughout our history have opportunistically allowed themselves to be reshaped to gain advantage.

I think its terrible how some people who do this, are also promoting bigoted views of black people as a group.

But I don't think we should discount that there may be subcultures with superior or inferior cultural values, nor that this may be a problem for our society.

There are some christian communities that have much higher cultural standards in ethics than mainstream culture. And there are subcultures of predominantly educated white people with awful values - just see enron. Or much of congress.

We should not discount that being raised with certain beliefs and values leads people to do good or bad things, have different results in life, and that this plays a role in issues facing some parts of the black community.

Maybe 'they' aren't one single organism with a single shared mind distributed through millions of bodies?

Maybe a group of black (and white) people believe that our society doesn't value black lives enough - while _another_ set of black (and white) people have a criminal disregard for the value other people's lives.

The fact that violent black crime exists doesn't invalidate any of the messages of the 'black lives matter' movement.




For too many people, yes, this is true. There are _some_ 'black lives matter' people who won't even allow a conversation about black crime - they insist that the conversation itself is racist.

As with many political movements, the passionate idiots have taken over the megaphone, while the intelligent, wise, compassionate people stand in the shadows.

Yes. Exactly. These folks are a damn cult. This is the new generation of millennial 'progressive' anti-racists (and feminists). They aggressively try to censor, shut down, and shame everybody who doesn't toe the extremist party line.

Rarely do I hear of any older black folks or mature feminists agreeing with their insanity.

I support the basic idea of swapping out one of the men on our bills for a woman, though I don't know if Hamilton is the best choice.

Too much of the conversation that the left is having about this is insane. There are some people who won't be happy unless the woman chosen is at the intersection of all possible 'oppressed classes'.

That's an anti-climatic way to end your post. Anyone who cites "Treyvon Martin and Michael Brown" as evidence of injustice in society is drinking the progressive, liberal, anti-racist kool aid.

There continues to be injustice towards black people in the US, today, but those two cases are NOT evidence of this.

They are, in fact, evidence of how far the 'anti racists' will go to deny facts inconsistent with their rhetoric.

I respect your choice to not respond, if you prefer.

I still don't know _who_ might have tasted human flesh in order to validate the comparison using personal experiences.

As for this:



That doesn't follow. Being able to chemically sense something doesn't require that the organism always catabolize the thing at every opportunity.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that the national NAACP did not ask her to step down.

Which black people?

Who made the comparison and figured this out?

>> Well to be honest I don't know where they came to that conclusion

This lie has been widely circulated for decades. It is absolutely loved by the 'human potential' crowd.

>> I find it believable due to most of the stuff we learn we forget or it becomes obsolete.

Its trued that our brains are not perfect, and its also true that most of us are not using it as well as we could. That doesn't justify the 10% claim.

Are you as physically strong as you could be? No? Does that mean you are only using 10% of your muscle?

> I do believe that we could use more of our brains than we do.

By what measure would we use 'more' ? And how much 'more'?

You are already using your entire brain. Using it better doesn't mean 'using a larger percentage of it.'

But the important thing here is: Be wary of anyone selling a book, making a movie, or giving a speech who uses this claim.

Its a pretty clear indication that the person speaking is either ignorant or dishonest, and their message is not to be trusted.

That may be true for some of her critics, but as far as I can tell, most of the lynch mob are liberals/progressives who are more concerned with comparing this to 'blackface' and 'cultural appropriation'.

They say stupid things like "we all know that transgender is a thing, while transracial is not a thing, so she is a bad person.'

I don't know her, I don't know how honest she is being in these interviews, I don't know the real reasons she is doing this.

I do know that lynch mobs are usually more interested in feeding their own self righteous hatred then they are in taking a careful look at _why_ they are out for blood.

Well that movie is clearly is not a reliable source of information. The 10% myth is rooted in a basic misunderstanding of brain function.

Humans are using 100% of their brains!

Different areas serve different purposes, and different types of cells in the brain serve different purposes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_percent_of_the_brain_myth

from: http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/darwin_nazism.htm

If you stick straight to science, then you stick straight to the fact that evolution is real. Evolution is the reason we have such a diversity of species on this planet.

Rejecting evolution because you disagree with Darwin on some other topic is foolish. The truth of a claim is independent of the person making the claim.