Africans less intelligent than Westerners, says DNA pioneer

[Somali2003]

[quote="MAD MAC.

Having said that, I also believe it is quite possible that racial groups are pre-disposed to certain characteristics and we should not be afraid to explore what those are in a scientific manner. Regardless of the generalities, it doesn't change the fact that individuals should be judges on their own merit, and not according to race.[/quote]

Mad Mac, Perhaps you haven't been reading enough on the debate of human genes and how many biotechnological institutions strove to improve it by manipulating the genetics of human embryos. This is not limited to one race as it is hard to classify races today(Gurey's remark was based on this). Would you believe if I tell you that the old racial dichotomy of pure white or pure black is taking a new shift. A new term has been coined known as "biege" which would be a majority in United States. The crisp divide of the races in the United States will not be relevant, so contrary to the nativist conservatives, there is NO a clear distinction as to who is white or black. Roughly one in 25 of married couples are interracial. Watson's case is probably based on this and he fears the loss of WHITE ethnic characteristics according to indications of the demographic trends from U.S Census Bureau.

Gregory Stock, a biophysicit, and many other scientist like him debated on many times any attempt to ban technologies that enhance the functions of our genes is potentially dangerous and borders on undesirable government intrusions. Stock states that not banning these technologies is beneficial to societies as they make choices to modify the genes and pick the embryo with the desired genes. On the other hand, Fakuyama, an author of “In Defense of Nature, Human and Non-Human" and professor at John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, argues for strict regulation of bioengineering and warns unintended consequences if we alter or modify our genes to improve our lives. His claim is that safety problems will proliferate as parents risk externalities decades after the procedure is done. Both authors’ first difference is a matter of assumptions. Stock argues that developing these technologies is innocuous and beneficial to society, whereas Fakuyama appeals to long-term consequences and fears what will happen if such technologies prevail.
For Stock, sex selections, which would give parents the predisposition to select desirable genes toward different talents and temperaments will only improve the performance of their children and would not result in gender imbalance as it is evident in Britain. For Fakuyama, such selections indeed cause negative externalities. He gives an example of a mother who would probably be left to deal with a failed experiment. The mother attempted to raise her child’s IQ, but in doing so, raised the likelihood of her child to contract other diseases like “greater propensity for cancer, or prolonged debility in old age,” (Fakuyama). More importantly, Fakuyama makes the analogy that this time the failed experiment would not impact an ecosystem or mere environment but a human being. He again argues that we haven’t yet reached the level to understand the origin of our lives, albeit some evidences that our life evolved from other forms of life, let alone determining the benefits of manipulating and mastering our genes.
A third difference between the authors is a matter of values and priorities. Fakuyama raises the notion of universal rules of such as justice and equality. He argues what constitutes an improvement of a human being whose evolutionary ORIGIN WE HAVE YET TO GRASP. For instance, Fakuyama argues that human beings are more complex and perfect in its own nature, but who is right or wrong to manipulate our genes to correct which ones are defect or which genes have natural predisposition to perfect emotional, physical, or mental traits. It is a fact that a persecuted society, in order to join the mainstream society to better their lives or to be accepted as equal, would be predisposed to abandon the characteristics that define their distinct race and thus might endanger the diversity of any country. Fakuyama makes the claim if this scenario splinters out of control, then it might also undermine the very basis of equal democratic rights . The less diverse society is the less consciously tolerant people would be.

My point is that this is a very complicated subject that borders on racism.

I would suggest that you explore these two authors' counter arguments.

[Gedo_Boy]

on top of that he was talking about Africans and then he said something like:

"Anybody who has had black employees could tell you that..."

So he was talking about Africans and then mentions his observations of AFrican Americans
This is his basis for African work ethic. In fact, Africans, sub-Saharan or otherwise are very hardworking immigrants in many nations.

There is a Ghanian mother who I work with (and she and her husband are both educated to the Master's Level) and she was telling me how her boy's teachers told her quite candidly/matter-of-factly that in Kindergarden/1st grade the black kids tended to be the most clever and sharpest kids but as she followed them into the 6th/7th grades she found that many had succumbed to the circumstances they grew up among like crime,drugs, sex, and all sorts of societal ills their non-inner city counterparts have had to contend with.

[mahamed99_sex]

what the fock are you people mumbling about? you people are obessed with african people way too much...but then again....arent yall africans too.seriously.......get over yourself hate theme yall got going on.non somalis have accomplish more than y'all ever will have .

[Wareer]

[quote="MAD MAC"]"- . I believe the primary reason is that Africa has over 1,000 seperate languages, as compared to Europe with barely 100, and only a handful of meaningful ones.

.[/quote]


What is the size of Europe? The whole size of Europe is like Sudan and Nigeria combined.



http://www.bu.edu/africa/outreach/images/covimg.gif

[Basra-]

Gamadid


I am still awaiting your response on this thread!

[Megatron]

[quote="ThaGame"]

Maybe you should do some more reading about the languages and dialects spoken in Somalia. The facts that are clearly outlined from other legitimate sources of information contradict what you and the other poster have implied.

>> Again, we are referring to languages exclusively, not dialects. And I maintain that Af Soomali is the lone "Official" language of Somalia. Spoken i'd guess by well over 95% of the population. Please, refresh me. What, and where, are these "legitimate sources of information" that contradict ?

Mayan and Incas are native indigenous peoples. They are not Hispanic in watever shape or form.

>> Yes, I know that. I didn't imply that they were.


Somali is a language that is linked to other eastern cushitic languages.

>> Which one's might they be?


[/quote]