Well, well, well…that’s a surprise. But if they really investigate, they’ll find a huge number of colleges (most) discriminate against Whites – particularly White men – in admissions.
Yeah…can’t the “God Emperor” eliminate affirmative action on the Federal government level (government hiring) simply by signing a decree to that effect? Colleges are another thing of course, but why doesn’t he do what he has the authority to do?
Some more good news…immigration restriction? Note that pink-frilled female GOP senator Miss Lindsey Graham objects. We need dem dere restaurant workers!
I thought Antifa was “shrugged off?”
1. Remind me who the President and Attorney General are again. Have they declared Antifa a terrorist organization yet? Civil rights violations by Antifa? Attempted murder charges – holding someone under water?
2. I thought the security there were “tough state police who don’t take guff from anyone?”
3. Obviously, private security is required at such meetings, or even something as informal as attendees always moving around in “wolf pack” groups for self-protection. Obviously, the “don’t take guff” security there are more interested in arresting attendees who are trying to defend themselves against being murdered.
This highly observant attendee wasn’t afraid to take the podium to present what he considered to be a serious problem for Nyborg’s thesis. If cold climates create strong selective pressures for high IQ, why aren’t the Inuit one of the smartest peoples on Earth? Nyborg responded that in certain areas, the local ecosystem is limited by the amount of solar energy reaching that location year-round, which in turn limits the extent to which the population can grow, which in turn leads to inbreeding depression as people in small populations will end up reproducing with others from whom they aren’t very genetically distant.
Nyborg’s explanation could possibly be correct. It also possibly is yet another example of the HBDers using Occam’s Butterknife to hand-wave ad hoc explanations to excuse refuted hypotheses. Consider: when was the last time you read or heard an HBDer say – “I was wrong” or “Maybe I am wrong” or “Yes, the data do not fit my hypothesis, perhaps the hypothesis is wrong and needs to be reconsidered” or “Yes, my hypothesis is wrong, we need something new?” Answer: never. That’s because HBD is absolute pseudoscience, or, if you want to be more charitable, it is hardcore Kuhnian science without a picogram of Popperian epistemology.