In my Defense: Amicus...

[amicus]

I should also add, in defense of truth and free speech....

Elizabetht took the unusual opportunity to attack a single person on this forum in a thread dedicated to just that person.

I don't mind. I am a big boy. However, that accusations therein concerned inaccurate statements and falsehoods, is not worthy of any participant on this or any other forum.

On one hand, the 'usual suspects' accuse Governor Palin of banning books, which she did not, and how much they oppose censorship and on the other hand the hue and cry to ban, censor, 'Amicus', rings down the aisles of the left.

There is a tight little clique of 'believers' on this forum, as noted by DG, that attempts to squelch any opinion that runs counter to the liberal mantra that is rampant on this forum.

Part of the advertisement for Literotica is that we value free speech for all; that, one assumes, holds even more true for an Author's Hangout wherein writer's speak of their craft and the underlying themes that power them.

I am reposting as a new thread, my response to the personal attack as I think the issue of banning and censorship need be addressed in detail. Further to draw attention to the 'blogosphere' environment being created by political posters who disregard accuracy and repeat and propagate unfounded accusations in both camps.

That is beneath this forum.

~~~

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders

In 2005, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites.

***

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/race/

Out of a total population of 1,976,019 incarcerated in adult facilities, 1,239,946 or 63 percent are black or Latino, though these two groups constitute only 25 percent of the national population.4

In twelve states, between 10 and 15 percent of adult black men are incarcerated.

· In ten states, between 5 and 10 percent of black adults are incarcerated.


· In twelve states, black men are incarcerated at rates between twelve and sixteen times greater than those of white men.


· In fifteen states, black women are incarcerated at rates between ten and thirty-five times greater than those of white women.


· In six states, black youth under age eighteen are incarcerated in adult facilities at rates between twelve and twenty-five times greater than those of white youth.

***

http://www.mankindquarterly.org/winter2003_meisenberg.pdf

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/bellcurve.shtml#part3

Ethnic Differences in Cognitive Ability

- East Asians typically earn higher IQ scores than white Americans, especially in the verbal intelligence areas. African-Americans typically earn IQ scores one full standard deviation below those of white Americans. The IQ difference between African-Americans and whites remains at all levels of socioeconomic status (SES), and is even more pronounced at higher levels of SES.

http://www.crusader.net/texts/ygg/y21.html

Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level. The bell curves of different groups overlap considerably, but groups often differ in where their members tend to cluster along the IQ line. The bell curves for some groups (Jews and East Asians) are centered somewhat higher than for whites in general. Other groups (blacks and Hispanics) ale centered somewhat lower than non-Hispanic whites.


The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered.



Practical Importance

IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life (education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social competence), and modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness). Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance.

A high IQ is an advantage in life because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making. Conversely, a low IQ is often a disadvantage, especially in disorganized environments. Of course, a high IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ guarantees failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in our society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.

The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life settings become more complex (novel, ambiguous, changing, unpredictable, or multifaceted). For example, a high IQ is generally necessary to perform well in highly complex or fluid jobs (the professions, management): it is a considerable advantage in moderately complex jobs (crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less advantage in settings that require only routine decision making or simple problem solving (unskilled work).

Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in education, training, and highly complex jobs (no one claims they are), but intelligence is often the most important. When individuals have already been selected for high (or low) intelligence and so do not differ as much in IQ, as in graduate school (or special education), other influences on performance loom larger in comparison.

Certain personality traits, special talents, aptitudes, physical capabilities, experience, and the like are important (sometimes essential) for successful performance in many jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) applicability or "transferability" across tasks and settings compared with general intelligence. Some scholars choose to refer to these other human traits as other "intelligences."

~~~


~~~

In the early days of my career as a talk radio and television show personality, it did not take long for me to become aware that my words, thoughts, assumptions and statements were heard by many, including experts, college professors, professional people from all walks of life, plus the common caller who could be left or right, moderate or extreme and radical, religious, upset, ranting, raving or just plain full of shit.

Suffice it to say, I quickly learned not to utter a word, a conclusion or a premise unless I could document it and back it up.

That holds true yet today as a matter of principle on this and all other venues I speak to.

Your hatred, disagreement, name calling and the exposure of your total ignorance of the subject under discussion, does not trouble me in the least, but your assault on my veracity, integrity and honesty, requires defense.

From this point on, you might show the common courtesy to do your own research before you criticize...that is if you have a shred of honesty in your persona.

Amicus...the accurate one...

 

[impressive]

You called for me to be quartered on another thread for something as simple as attaching strings to public support -- for requiring recipients to accept responsibility and be accountable. That's beyond reasonable and into downright hateful. So, before you go throwing stones, I think you should look to your own damned glass house.

I once thought you an intelligent and decent, if misguided, person. But I have lost what little respect I had for you. It matters not to me if or how you respond. You cannot disappoint me, for I have no expectations of you.

Regardless of the fact that you want me brutally murdered, I wish you well.

 

[xssve]

I'll never try to shut you up amicus, but you have lost all credibility, even as civilized person - keep that elaborate feigned politesse up there chum, you're gonna need it.

You don't want to be attacked for your opinions, don't be so fucking stupid - your bullshit is factually wrong and personally offensive, and no person of decency and common sense can allow it to pass unremarked, deal with it.

 

[amicus]

You folks remain averse to facts, even when I provide the links for you.

Not that that surprises me.

Amicus...

 

[Recidiva]

Amicus, as much as I have attempted to separate personal feelings from discourse, you have a tendency to lose your temper and lose your reason and then threaten people and start saying all manner of foolishness.

People calling you out on your foolishness are not cowards, they're possibly enraged or insulted or amused.

But if you consider it a cowardly medium by nature, perhaps you could refrain from your overblown and offensive attitudes and threats. And you can also leave this cowardly medium if you cannot bear people's opinions about you.

What you appear to be to me is intensely thin skinned, unable to tolerate any difference of opinion from yours, and willing to use excessive and ludicrous verbal arguments to make your case.

Once that case is made, which you feel entirely justified making, you behave as if someone stomped on your sand castle if they deconstruct your language, intention and methods.

 

[amicus]

Why not address the content of the thread, that of black crime and IQ, instead of the continuing personal attacks? Thas like three in row...thas all you got, bitchy female retorts?

Ami...

 

[Recidiva]

Why not address the content of the thread, that of black crime and IQ, instead of the continuing personal attacks? Thas like three in row...thas all you got, bitchy female retorts?

Ami...

Because no matter how much concern or consideration I put into dealing with your requests, it will not be reciprocated.

Signed - A Cow

 

[neonlyte]

Why not address the content of the thread, that of black crime and IQ, instead of the continuing personal attacks? Thas like three in row...thas all you got, bitchy female retorts?

Ami...

Do you want to start? Why are significant percentages of your population under achieving? Let's see if we can do this without mentioning the words genetic or race and dirivatives thereof.

 

[amicus]

It is derivative, by the way and my main squeeze is left wing liberal intellectuals and that seems not to depend on genetics at all, just ignorance and stupidity, which is the common denominator in all believers...

yasm...

Ami

 

[Guest]

***

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/race/

Out of a total population of 1,976,019 incarcerated in adult facilities, 1,239,946 or 63 percent are black or Latino, though these two groups constitute only 25 percent of the national population.4

In twelve states, between 10 and 15 percent of adult black men are incarcerated.

· In ten states, between 5 and 10 percent of black adults are incarcerated.


· In twelve states, black men are incarcerated at rates between twelve and sixteen times greater than those of white men.


· In fifteen states, black women are incarcerated at rates between ten and thirty-five times greater than those of white women.


· In six states, black youth under age eighteen are incarcerated in adult facilities at rates between twelve and twenty-five times greater than those of white youth.

Just to set the record straight... Mighty selective citations, there, Amicus. You throw out bald statistics without including the additional findings and discussion from the same source that strongly suggest that this is more a systemic problem than an accurate reflection of the activities of a group.

From the source Amicus cited above, further down on the same page:

Blacks have also been disproportionately affected by the national "war on drugs", carried out primarily through the arrest, prosecution and imprisonment of street level drug offenders from inner city communities. In 1996, for example, blacks constituted 62.6 percent of all drug offenders admitted to state prisons. In at least fifteen states, black men were sent to prison on drug charges at rates ranging from twenty to fifty-seven times those of white men.7 Blacks are prosecuted in federal courts more frequently than whites for crack cocaine offenses, and thus as a group have felt the effects of the longer sentences for crack versus powder cocaine mandated in federal law. Racial profiling and other forms of unequal treatment of minorities by the criminal justice system have further contributed to the overrepresentation of minorities in the incarcerated population. Minority youth are treated far more harshly compared to similarly situated white counterparts within the juvenile criminal justice system.8

 

[amicus]

That is one reason I included the link, that others may read. Sometimes I include the key words in my search, so that others may choose themselves from the thousands of sources provided.

I cited and quoted those portions I found pertinent to my argument, make your own case with your own quotes, why should I make your point for you?

If you do your own independent search, you will find a paucity of legitimate sources for IQ levels as it has become a politically incorrect and inappropriate inquiry in the socially conscious world of the left. No one wants to know the true facts.

Thus, most of my citations were US government statistics, that can be documented by anyone. The portion you quoted is opinion and explanation, not facts....

Amicus...

 

[CharleyH]

I should also add, in defense of truth and free speech....

Elizabetht took the unusual opportunity to attack a single person on this forum in a thread dedicated to just that person.

I don't mind. I am a big boy. However, that accusations therein concerned inaccurate statements and falsehoods, is not worthy of any participant on this or any other forum.

On one hand, the 'usual suspects' accuse Governor Palin of banning books, which she did not, and how much they oppose censorship and on the other hand the hue and cry to ban, censor, 'Amicus', rings down the aisles of the left.

There is a tight little clique of 'believers' on this forum, as noted by DG, that attempts to squelch any opinion that runs counter to the liberal mantra that is rampant on this forum.

Part of the advertisement for Literotica is that we value free speech for all; that, one assumes, holds even more true for an Author's Hangout wherein writer's speak of their craft and the underlying themes that power them.

I am reposting as a new thread, my response to the personal attack as I think the issue of banning and censorship need be addressed in detail. Further to draw attention to the 'blogosphere' environment being created by political posters who disregard accuracy and repeat and propagate unfounded accusations in both camps.

That is beneath this forum.

~~~

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm




***

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/race/



***

http://www.mankindquarterly.org/winter2003_meisenberg.pdf

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/bellcurve.shtml#part3



http://www.crusader.net/texts/ygg/y21.html



~~~


~~~

In the early days of my career as a talk radio and television show personality, it did not take long for me to become aware that my words, thoughts, assumptions and statements were heard by many, including experts, college professors, professional people from all walks of life, plus the common caller who could be left or right, moderate or extreme and radical, religious, upset, ranting, raving or just plain full of shit.

Suffice it to say, I quickly learned not to utter a word, a conclusion or a premise unless I could document it and back it up.

That holds true yet today as a matter of principle on this and all other venues I speak to.

Your hatred, disagreement, name calling and the exposure of your total ignorance of the subject under discussion, does not trouble me in the least, but your assault on my veracity, integrity and honesty, requires defense.

From this point on, you might show the common courtesy to do your own research before you criticize...that is if you have a shred of honesty in your persona.

Amicus...the accurate one...

Such a long post, Ami. Any big girl would have just laughed, as Liz is doing right now, I hope.

 

[amicus]

Hi, Charlie, your usual, 'blond' reply, I see, howzit?

Amicus...

 

[neonlyte]

It is derivative, by the way and my main squeeze is left wing liberal intellectuals and that seems not to depend on genetics at all, just ignorance and stupidity, which is the common denominator in all believers...

yasm...

Ami

Thank you for the contribution to my spelling knowledge - that's one other trouble with us lefties, no time saving the world to lern how to spell.

Love and kisses, Ami

 

[Guest]

Such a long post, Ami. Any big girl would have just laughed, as Liz is doing right now, I hope.

Hiya Charlie... yep yep.

Sitting here playing a hidden object game, it is very so much more interesting

 

[CharleyH]

Hi, Charlie, your usual, 'blond' reply, I see, howzit?

Amicus...

Well, I see you are doing your usual small dick reply, so why not pull my blonde?

 

[amicus]

Jes cuz I luv ya, kid, just cuz I love ya...but, knowing me, I would pull anything blonde from a female that is available and be most appreciative...

ami

 

[Oli72]

Why not address the content of the thread, that of black crime and IQ, instead of the continuing personal attacks? Thas like three in row...thas all you got, bitchy female retorts?

Ami...

Amicus, I doubt you actually understand what IQ is, or what the bell curves are you cite, otherwise you would not wave them around as "facts". IQ is not a natural phenomenon but an artificial construct that measures very specific things. It doesn't measure "intelligence" because that is an abstract concept and the IQ can only measure concrete things. It measures the ability to solve a very specific subset of problems, no more, no less. And as far as bell curves are concerned, the bell curve of the hematocrit for women is centered differently than that for men -does that allow any specific statements? Yes, one: The one that the hematocrit for women is usually lower than that of men. No more, no less. It doesn't say ANYTHING about women in general, because women CAN have a higher hematocrit than men, and it doesn't say anything about one specific woman.

As for your claim of a paucity of sources on IQ, it can only be attributed to an absolute and utter ignorance of scientific sources. If you actually had an idea about "fact", you would know that there's a host of scientific studies in this field. PubMed, the database of scientific publications in the biomedical field, finds over 10,000 hits, and this DOES include a host of publications that appeared only this year.

Signed: Someone with an IQ tested to be 140+ on a 15 SD test and a PhD in biomedical sciences.

P.S.: It's not enough to have read something somewhere if you neither understood it nor scrutinized it critically.

 

[amicus]

Oh, my, a Kraut virgin waving credentials on a porn site, gimme a break, I'll match your 140+ with a 150+ and a two tier doctorate with three honoraries, wanna play sum more?

amicus the new intellectual...(AR)

 

[CharleyH]

Jes cuz I luv ya, kid, just cuz I love ya...but, knowing me, I would pull anything blonde from a female that is available and be most appreciative...

ami

LOL Love ya!

 

[sr71plt]

Can't play the post-only-to-provoke Internet game and expect to be loved and respected, amicus. You dug it; you'll have to wallow in it.

And you've taken it beyond isolated facts and statistics, so no use trying to use that as a shovel anymore, either.

 

[Guest]

That is one reason I included the link, that others may read. Sometimes I include the key words in my search, so that others may choose themselves from the thousands of sources provided.

I cited and quoted those portions I found pertinent to my argument, make your own case with your own quotes, why should I make your point for you?

If you do your own independent search, you will find a paucity of legitimate sources for IQ levels as it has become a politically incorrect and inappropriate inquiry in the socially conscious world of the left. No one wants to know the true facts.

Thus, most of my citations were US government statistics, that can be documented by anyone. The portion you quoted is opinion and explanation, not facts....

Amicus...

Ah... my mistake. I thought you had some pretension toward academic rigor, or at least intellectual honesty--but you just like to argue.

Never mind.

 

[amicus]

Academic rigor? WTF, are you still in school? This ain't no college essay or a thesis, this is a forum where, when I came on it, there was not a single voice on one side of the issues.

Not one. As I am an atheist, a radical capitalist, one who supports life, who holds that homosexuality is a mental illness, knows the ozone scare and global warming fanatics and the eco nuts to be one and the same, I took it upon myself to present that point of view.

It didn't surprise me to find that I was like an atheist in church, but at least xtians show a degree of tolerance while the radical left does not.

If you are not with them, you are against them as most anyone who has tried to debate the liberal mantra has found out and most withdraw and conclude that this is a liberal only site and all others are not welcome.

And mean spirited? OMG, these so called diversified, tolerant of all opinions, are the most cruel and unkind I have ever known. And as others have said, like hens in a chicken yard, they all descend upon anyone who dares disagree.

Look at the vile thread attacking the female Republican VP candidate, page after page of pure hatred; had there been an equal thread on Black Obama, the roof would have fallen in here.


Oh, well, I think I have had enough fun for one Sunday....be well y'all...

Amicus...

 

[Oli72]

Oh, my, a Kraut virgin waving credentials on a porn site, gimme a break, I'll match your 140+ with a 150+ and a two tier doctorate with three honoraries, wanna play sum more?

So much for your interest in facts.

Apparently, they suddenly don't matter when you've been caught red-handed with made-up arguments. But hey, what would you expect from someone who claims some heavenly enlightenment brought him his knowledge -after all, you can't have it through honest-to-god research, given that the fact all line up against you.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

OLI72

It seems to me you dont know how tests are normed.

You create representative cohorts, give them a battery of questions, and save all the questions EVERYONE in the cohort gets right. This includes young, old, male, female, black, white, rich, poor, etc.

The WESCHLER ADULT INTELLIGENCE SCALE uses something like 13 cohorts to get a test that is almost bias free. The test measures how well people solve logical, math, verbal, and memory tasks. The generally accepted definition for intelligence is "ITS WHAT YOU USE WHEN YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT TO DO."

Psychologists did an experiment involving the claim that the WAIS is biased against blacks. A panel of college asshats and blacks examined the test questions and identified several they believed were biased against blacks. Then the psychologists gave a 'test' to a black/white control group, and almost everyone answered the 'biased' questions correctly.