Notices
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Who is top dog overall.

  1. #1 Who is top dog overall. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    It is my contention that overall the Caucasian race is the highest achieving one in both the arts and sciences. My own sources show much to disipute this, but this is my belief. I was kicked off one forum for expressing this politically incorrect view, so I will tread carefully here.

    There is some evidence that this whole subject is so much hot air.

    I hope other members will enlighten me to their views on this subject.

    Sorurces: La Griffe du Lion. This can be accessed by typing: HTTP://www.lagriffedulion.F2s.com/ and Gene Expression European Innovation. This can be accessed by typing these words on your browser.

    Greg858


    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 No replys. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    "An inconvienient truth"

    "I said we were the greatest, not the smartest."

    Greg858


    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    22
    why would you have a belief that any race is "greater" or better than any other? Do you think people just sit around at the dinner table talking about white being better than asians or spaniards being better than blacks? if they do, that's pretty lame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    i can't believe that anyone still thinks there's any merit in any kind of eugenics
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 I am happy. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    For awhile I was wondering if everyone on this cerebral site believed that either I was too stupid to merit a reply, or that I was just a B.S.er who wanted to stirr up contention for fun, as I seemed to imply? This is a scientific blog, I tend to agree with all of those who have responed, and believe this discussion should end here

    Greg858
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 I think I gave some others the wrong impression. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Do any of you think I'm sadistic? Since I traded my SUV for an economy car, people have been vandelizing it and stealing gasoline, and I feel if my blood pressure has to be high, everyone's has to be high! This has stopped so I will stop.

    Greg858 8)
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    How exactly do you define 'highest achieving'? Sure the europeans, americans etc. may look as if they have claimed all the recent advances but you must consider the ancient advances which were quite simply stupendous for the time period. Take for example the construction of the pyramids or the hanging gardens of Babylon. You must also consider that just because a country was 'first' doesn't necessarily make them the most successful. Take for example the development of nuclear physics where while The Allies were first the Chinese have actually further developed this science so that they are practically on the verge of creating nuclear fusion plants on a viable scale! Finally, when judging success you must also judge failures - as a race the caucasians have had some absolute corkers! Take for example where the view that we are better than everyone else got us... :wink: .... 60 million lives were spent as a result of that particular failure.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 I agree. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    I agree with you, dude! If you read my last message, you know my motavation for starting this thread. Maybe you are like me, and want to rumanate over this stuff? Keep in mind this is a scientific site, and should we have a protracted discussion on something of this nature? The only thing I disagree with you is your assertion that Babalonians wern't white. Others have said that the Romans and Greeks weren't either. They or I must have read books that were written on Mars. I have read that Caucasians are the most varied of the three races, and this causes some confusion. One doesn't have to be fair to be Caucasian. Facial features and hair tecture make some olive skinned, or even darker people recognisably white, and I have read that they are classified as such.

    Greg858 :-D
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Proof 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    If you read the sources cited on my first blog, I have seemingly "Proved" something silly. Elsewhere on this site someone seems to have an airtight case, at least for someone of my intellect and ability, of something silly about cosmology.

    I acknowledge my educational and intellectual inferiority to many other posters on this site, but this does'nt mean I can't prevail in a debate against them. I havn't thus far, but now that I seem hopelessly outmatched by some other bloggers, I will enlist more trained allies with better minds. They are on the internet and are easily accessable.

    Greg858
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    I suppose it is possible to see it as nothing more than a roll of the dice. It could of just as easily come up as a pair of six'es rather than "snake eyes". With one or two different turns history could have played out completely different. But as far as I know, there is only one world history to choose from. And when I study world history my theory is this:

    Yes, the caucasian race is superior to all others.

    But heres the catch. The white race is only superior by way of domination.

    I would say that most forms of reading, writing, math, science, agriculture, law and all other complex sociopolitical elements of early civilization were first developed by the peoples of China, India, The Middle East and North Africa. The Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians. The Xia Dynasty, the Shang Dynasty, the people of the Indus Valley, the people of the Vedic and of course, the ancient Egyptian empire which lasted at least three and half thousand years. All of these city-states came into being a hundred generations before any civilized state ever existed in the western continents. The dark skinned people of the east might as well be the forefathers of civilization.

    Whether or not it is a result of genetics or just a roll of the dice, my theory is that the caucasian race is more inherently predisposed to barbaric tendencies than any other race on the planet. This is not to suggest that other races of the world do not share a history of brutal uncivilized war-mongering because they most certainly do. Yet I don't think that people today realize with full totality the kind of primal war-driven violence that once dominated the lands of Europe. Some of the most brutal clans and migrations of human beings who ever lived, lived during the medieval and pre-medieval era of what is now Russia, Scandinavia, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Ireland, the British isles and all of the smaller countries both around and in between. The Iberians, Saxons, Celts, Gael, Picts, Goths, Ostrogoths, Visgoths, Aryan-Goths, Vandals, Teutons, Britons, Franks and the Vikings. All of these terms represent the many mixed and varying degrees of Indo-European inhabitants. In many ways these people were much like the various tribes of Native Americans in the sense that there were just as many battles and skirmishes throughout as there were trades. Eventually these people would be endowed with social and political advancements given to them directly or indirectly by Roman conquest and christianity. And since Romes predecessors were those of ancient Macedonia and Greece, it could be seen that the mediterranean peoples were the first intermediate caucasian race that bridged the gap between the enlightend civilizations of the east with the cold dark ages of the west.

    Yet it should be noted that the term "Civilization" does not necessarily = Smart - and - The term "Barbarianism" does not necessarily = Stupid. It has far less to do with intelligence and far more to do with behavior. Farming, metal working, trade, commerce, sophisticated song/dance, poetry and other art forms along with isolated monarchies had already existed way back during the first celtic colonization of what is now Great Britain. By the reign of Charlemagne in the 8th century A.D. there was a vast stretch of fairly complex civilized communities throughout Europe. But civilized to what aim?

    In the east, so much of what civilization represented was a kind of "Pursuit of Spiritual and Intellectual Enlightenment" but in the west civilization meant "Power" and "War". Think about it. The Crusades were the first major world war campaign. And this massive scale conflict was the product of who? - None other than the northern white race of christendom. Barbarianism alone is a kind of harden ruthlesness where survival, often by way of hierarchy, is the prime directive. A blunt crude unsophsticated state of behavior in which the individual has little or no regard for any kind of poppper etiquette or social norm. That is unless such mannerisms are deemed necessary to staying alive. Even animals use an etiquette of one form or another.

    I think that once you take such a prominent barbaric nature and merge it with the fruits and benifets of a civilized nurture, the end result is a living thing that is socially sophisticated but still inherently ruthless. I think that by civilizing the barbarians, the caucasian race of the western hemisphere became, what you might call, the bullies of world history. Domination has always been the name of the game. Colonize - Divide and Conquer.

    Of course I don't think that caucasians are better. Such a concept is completely absurd. In fact, I would say that in so many ways, the white race is historically inferior to all others. Yet by none other than sheer brute force it seems that caucasian people have taken the mantel in terms of world power and domination. I am not sure how one could argue otherwise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Hmm it's also interesting to note that almost all serial killers are white. Perhaps your on to something.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolt
    I suppose it is possible to see it as nothing more than a roll of the dice. It could of just as easily come up as a pair of six'es rather than "snake eyes". With one or two different turns history could have played out completely different. But as far as I know, there is only one world history to choose from. And when I study world history my theory is this:

    Yes, the caucasian race is superior to all others.

    But heres the catch. The white race is only superior by way of domination.

    I would say that most forms of reading, writing, math, science, agriculture, law and all other complex sociopolitical elements of early civilization were first developed by the peoples of China, India, The Middle East and North Africa. The Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians. The Xia Dynasty, the Shang Dynasty, the people of the Indus Valley, the people of the Vedic and of course, the ancient Egyptian empire which lasted at least three and half thousand years. All of these city-states came into being a hundred generations before any civilized state ever existed in the western continents. The dark skinned people of the east might as well be the forefathers of civilization.

    Whether or not it is a result of genetics or just a roll of the dice, my theory is that the caucasian race is more inherently predisposed to barbaric tendencies than any other race on the planet. This is not to suggest that other races of the world do not share a history of brutal uncivilized war-mongering because they most certainly do. Yet I don't think that people today realize with full totality the kind of primal war-driven violence that once dominated the lands of Europe. Some of the most brutal clans and migrations of human beings who ever lived, lived during the medieval and pre-medieval era of what is now Russia, Scandinavia, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Ireland, the British isles and all of the smaller countries both around and in between. The Iberians, Saxons, Celts, Gael, Picts, Goths, Ostrogoths, Visgoths, Aryan-Goths, Vandals, Teutons, Britons, Franks and the Vikings. All of these terms represent the many mixed and varying degrees of Indo-European inhabitants. In many ways these people were much like the various tribes of Native Americans in the sense that there were just as many battles and skirmishes throughout as there were trades. Eventually these people would be endowed with social and political advancements given to them directly or indirectly by Roman conquest and christianity. And since Romes predecessors were those of ancient Macedonia and Greece, it could be seen that the mediterranean peoples were the first intermediate caucasian race that bridged the gap between the enlightend civilizations of the east with the cold dark ages of the west.

    Yet it should be noted that the term "Civilization" does not necessarily = Smart - and - The term "Barbarianism" does not necessarily = Stupid. It has far less to do with intelligence and far more to do with behavior. Farming, metal working, trade, commerce, sophisticated song/dance, poetry and other art forms along with isolated monarchies had already existed way back during the first celtic colonization of what is now Great Britain. By the reign of Charlemagne in the 8th century A.D. there was a vast stretch of fairly complex civilized communities throughout Europe. But civilized to what aim?

    In the east, so much of what civilization represented was a kind of "Pursuit of Spiritual and Intellectual Enlightenment" but in the west civilization meant "Power" and "War". Think about it. The Crusades were the first major world war campaign. And this massive scale conflict was the product of who? - None other than the northern white race of christendom. Barbarianism alone is a kind of harden ruthlesness where survival, often by way of hierarchy, is the prime directive. A blunt crude unsophsticated state of behavior in which the individual has little or no regard for any kind of poppper etiquette or social norm. That is unless such mannerisms are deemed necessary to staying alive. Even animals use an etiquette of one form or another.

    I think that once you take such a prominent barbaric nature and merge it with the fruits and benifets of a civilized nurture, the end result is a living thing that is socially sophisticated but still inherently ruthless. I think that by civilizing the barbarians, the caucasian race of the western hemisphere became, what you might call, the bullies of world history. Domination has always been the name of the game. Colonize - Divide and Conquer.

    Of course I don't think that caucasians are better. Such a concept is completely absurd. In fact, I would say that in so many ways, the white race is historically inferior to all others. Yet by none other than sheer brute force it seems that caucasian people have taken the mantel in terms of world power and domination. I am not sure how one could argue otherwise.
    :-D

    I am aware, in part at least, of the things you have stated about us and our dusky brothern. Because I was aggrieved about my car, I thought I'd have some sarcastic fun, but you, as well as my sources, have turned the tables on me. I was hoping some white guys would toot their horn before you pointed this out, but none did. This site is too cerebral to bring up a subject of this nature, and myself and other white guys had best hush up on this subject.

    What happened in the thirties and fourties, not to mention the systematic extermination of the natives of the Americas, Australia, and New Zealand and the userption of their lands, makes me believe I should never have brought this subject up. I have gotten nothing but negative responses, and I have tried to end this discussion, but people keep responding.

    Greg858
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    what a weird response !?!
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by greg858
    I am aware, in part at least, of the things you have stated about us and our dusky brothern. Because I was aggrieved about my car, I thought I'd have some sarcastic fun, but you, as well as my sources, have turned the tables on me. I was hoping some white guys would toot their horn before you pointed this out, but none did. This site is too cerebral to bring up a subject of this nature, and myself and other white guys had best hush up on this subject.

    What happened in the thirties and fourties, not to mention the systematic extermination of the natives of the Americas, Australia, and New Zealand and the userption of their lands, makes me believe I should never have brought this subject up. I have gotten nothing but negative responses, and I have tried to end this discussion, but people keep responding.

    Greg858 :oops:

    I am having a little trouble fallowing your thoughts here. I think your topic is an interesting one and I apologize if my response seemed negative. That was not my intention. Nor was it my intention to offend anyone else by driving a bit too close to the curb on what could be considered racist.

    When I said that the caucasian race is superior, It was intended to be an incomplete concept. And one with a double meaning.

    Fundamentally, I believe that only an individual can be superior to any other. Regardless of their skin color and only by the choices they make - not by their genetic inprints or ethnic background.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    I am amazed by the propensity of others to toot someone elses horn! If I were a black guy, I would make the assertion that blacks are the coolest of cats, and could provide several sources to confirm it. You will notice that I placed this thread in a non scientific catagory, for in my judgement it is non scientific. Toot away, dudes and dudettes!

    Greg858 :-D
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by greg858
    I am amazed by the propensity of others to toot someone elses horn! If I were a black guy, I would make the assertion that blacks are the coolest of cats, and could provide several sources to confirm it. You will notice that I placed this thread in a non scientific catagory, for in my judgement it is non scientific. Toot away, dudes and dudettes!

    Greg858 :-D
    If someone told me to shut up, I would reply by saying I admire your wisdom!
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolt
    I suppose it is possible to see it as nothing more than a roll of the dice. It could of just as easily come up as a pair of six'es rather than "snake eyes". With one or two different turns history could have played out completely different. But as far as I know, there is only one world history to choose from. And when I study world history my theory is this:

    Yes, the caucasian race is superior to all others.

    But heres the catch. The white race is only superior by way of domination.

    I would say that most forms of reading, writing, math, science, agriculture, law and all other complex sociopolitical elements of early civilization were first developed by the peoples of China, India, The Middle East and North Africa. The Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians. The Xia Dynasty, the Shang Dynasty, the people of the Indus Valley, the people of the Vedic and of course, the ancient Egyptian empire which lasted at least three and half thousand years. All of these city-states came into being a hundred generations before any civilized state ever existed in the western continents. The dark skinned people of the east might as well be the forefathers of civilization.

    Whether or not it is a result of genetics or just a roll of the dice, my theory is that the caucasian race is more inherently predisposed to barbaric tendencies than any other race on the planet. This is not to suggest that other races of the world do not share a history of brutal uncivilized war-mongering because they most certainly do. Yet I don't think that people today realize with full totality the kind of primal war-driven violence that once dominated the lands of Europe. Some of the most brutal clans and migrations of human beings who ever lived, lived during the medieval and pre-medieval era of what is now Russia, Scandinavia, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Ireland, the British isles and all of the smaller countries both around and in between. The Iberians, Saxons, Celts, Gael, Picts, Goths, Ostrogoths, Visgoths, Aryan-Goths, Vandals, Teutons, Britons, Franks and the Vikings. All of these terms represent the many mixed and varying degrees of Indo-European inhabitants. In many ways these people were much like the various tribes of Native Americans in the sense that there were just as many battles and skirmishes throughout as there were trades. Eventually these people would be endowed with social and political advancements given to them directly or indirectly by Roman conquest and christianity. And since Romes predecessors were those of ancient Macedonia and Greece, it could be seen that the mediterranean peoples were the first intermediate caucasian race that bridged the gap between the enlightend civilizations of the east with the cold dark ages of the west.

    Yet it should be noted that the term "Civilization" does not necessarily = Smart - and - The term "Barbarianism" does not necessarily = Stupid. It has far less to do with intelligence and far more to do with behavior. Farming, metal working, trade, commerce, sophisticated song/dance, poetry and other art forms along with isolated monarchies had already existed way back during the first celtic colonization of what is now Great Britain. By the reign of Charlemagne in the 8th century A.D. there was a vast stretch of fairly complex civilized communities throughout Europe. But civilized to what aim?

    In the east, so much of what civilization represented was a kind of "Pursuit of Spiritual and Intellectual Enlightenment" but in the west civilization meant "Power" and "War". Think about it. The Crusades were the first major world war campaign. And this massive scale conflict was the product of who? - None other than the northern white race of christendom. Barbarianism alone is a kind of harden ruthlesness where survival, often by way of hierarchy, is the prime directive. A blunt crude unsophsticated state of behavior in which the individual has little or no regard for any kind of poppper etiquette or social norm. That is unless such mannerisms are deemed necessary to staying alive. Even animals use an etiquette of one form or another.

    I think that once you take such a prominent barbaric nature and merge it with the fruits and benifets of a civilized nurture, the end result is a living thing that is socially sophisticated but still inherently ruthless. I think that by civilizing the barbarians, the caucasian race of the western hemisphere became, what you might call, the bullies of world history. Domination has always been the name of the game. Colonize - Divide and Conquer.

    Of course I don't think that caucasians are better. Such a concept is completely absurd. In fact, I would say that in so many ways, the white race is historically inferior to all others. Yet by none other than sheer brute force it seems that caucasian people have taken the mantel in terms of world power and domination. I am not sure how one could argue otherwise.
    You will note that the title for this thread is: We are the top dog overall. I have noted and agree with you that in many ways non whites have it over us. What I am saying that in recent times most innovations in the arts and sciences have been white, and I feel that the reasons for this are probably genetic. Genetic deteriation is one possible explination why some groups don't seem to be what they were. You can argue this as well, but intuition tells me I am right.

    I want all respondants to read the two articals I have cited in their entirty, and note what the first one said about east Asian people right at the beginning. I feel I am fair. Who has been scrambling to get into white run countries all over the world? Who was the first to respond to overcrowding by lowering birth rates? Whites and their Asian immatators are the only people who can take care of themselves. Others have senced this and are trying to move in with us. It is cultural, but who has autored these cultures?

    Greg858
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18 A Truth. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Concerning me and my motavations for starting this thread: Steve was approaching the target in describing me as a troll, but Chemboy's quotes really hit the bullseye!

    Greg858
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    The concept of race has been pretty thoroughly invalidated by proper studies. There is more variation of DNA within members of a so-called 'race' than there are between 'races'. There has been a constant gene flow around the planet since prehistoric times, so that we are a decidedly mixed species. Because of the choke point that occured around 75000 years ago, there is much less variation in human genes than other large animals.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    The concept of race has been pretty thoroughly invalidated by proper studies. There is more variation of DNA within members of a so-called 'race' than there are between 'races'. There has been a constant gene flow around the planet since prehistoric times, so that we are a decidedly mixed species. Because of the choke point that occured around 75000 years ago, there is much less variation in human genes than other large animals.
    You are right, of course, but jive talkin' is fun!

    Greg858 8)
    gregory f. peischl
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21 Re: Who is top dog overall. 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by greg858
    It is my contention that overall the Caucasian race is the highest achieving one in both the arts and sciences.
    Given the fact that maths and science originated from the Arabs, this is highly unlikely.
    'Time is the space between birth and death' by me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •