Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

My agreement does indeed extend to his statement about some ethnic groups 'breeding like rabbits' - can't argue with the fact that not all families are of the same size. Observant Catholics are one group of immigrants, for example.

But you may remember I once referred to the white underclass in the UK.. babies are a way of getting more social benefit for many of them too. They may be the saviour of the white race.

I agree with your last statement that distinguishes between extinction and being a minority. I don't see what the fuss is about - embrace the change!

For some reason, I'm reminded of the 'Chicken Children':




Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:My agreement does indeed extend to his statement about some ethnic groups 'breeding like rabbits' - can't argue with the fact that not all families are of the same size. Observant Catholics are one group of immigrants, for example.

But you may remember I once referred to the white underclass in the UK.. babies are a way of getting more social benefit for many of them too. They may be the saviour of the white race.

I agree with your last statement that distinguishes between extinction and being a minority. I don't see what the fuss is about - embrace the change!

Observant Catholics (which would include all sects) come in all races.

I believe you referred to it was the "white ferral underclass". (Note to self: Check with BM she would remember) Are you saying that the underclass majority are white??

I've been around long enough to see more change you have Shaf, and I certainly don't have a problem with it. If I didn't I wouldn't have married an Arab (who, for the record is a lovely shade of brown ) I'm sure I'll see more change in my lifetime, but after that, well who knows?

Just think Shaf, maybe somewhere down the line one of your great great grandchildren will be looking through photos and point to your picture as ask: who is that brown man??? On the other side of the coin, maybe one of Dillons great great grandchild will look at family photos and point to him and ask: who is that white man???

shafique wrote: then haven't you mis-represented this 'Arab Gene' - isn't it actually a 'Semitic Gene'??

Cheers,
Shafique

No , but you have mis-understood: CAGS stands for Center for Arab Genome Studies, not for Semitic genome

Bora - I did refer to the White underclass in the UK in the context of not over-hyping the threat to 'Britishness' from immigrants.

I've absolutely no problem with my great grand children being either darker, lighter or whatever different shade from myself. In our extended families (wife and my side) we have relatives who have married black, white and even chinese - in my background, one of my ancestors was a black lady (my paternal grandmother's, grandmother). I have lineages that traces back to Bihar in one line, and to North West India in another.. quite different 'races' - one Pathan and other Bihari.

All the merrier, I say.

(Oh, and BTW - just in case you weren't pulling my leg - studying demographics IS my day-job! )

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Bora - I did refer to the White underclass in the UK in the context of not over-hyping the threat to 'Britishness' from immigrants.

I've absolutely no problem with my great grand children being either darker, lighter or whatever different shade from myself. In our extended families (wife and my side) we have relatives who have married black, white and even chinese - in my background, one of my ancestors was a black lady (my paternal grandmother's, grandmother). I have lineages that traces back to Bihar in one line, and to North West India in another.. quite different 'races' - one Pathan and other Bihari.

All the merrier, I say.

(Oh, and BTW - just in case you weren't pulling my leg - studying demographics IS my day-job! )

Cheers,
Shafique

Did you change jobs? Why have I been thinking all along that you were an accountant?? or is that your night job?

Sacre Bleu - me, an accountant!! (No, I'm an actuary. )

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:But you may remember I once referred to the white underclass in the UK.. babies are a way of getting more social benefit for many of them too. They may be the saviour of the white race.
Cheers,
Shafique

Well now you are talking about something where I know I have got loads more of experience than you as dishing out benefits is my line of work.

It's not the white feral under class that are claiming benefits for shed loads of kids but the Asians. Now they do breed like rabbits and from an early age. They all have the same like sounding names too which makes fraud rife and they are the most dishonest bunch of people around.
Fortunately we don't have this problem in my part of the country but I regularly go on training courses to other parts of the UK. The housing benefit staff from Manchester City Council have my sincere sympathies dealing with the brown feral robbing bastards down there. Most of the Asians couldn't tell the truth to save their lives.

Dillon, the alleles for darker skin, hair and eyes tend to be dominant over the alleles for the lighter types, that's why people agree that the majority of the population may end up beige one day

Hey BM, do you have a Warnakulasuriya Patabendige Ushantha Joseph Chaminda Vaas on the dole? How about Amunugama Rajapakse Rajakaruna Abeykoon Panditha Wasalamudiyanse Ralahamilage Rajitha Krishantha Bandara Amunugama (Born: 22 April 1969, Mawanella)? You may want to check on Sahibzaha Mohammad Shahid Khan Afridi.

kanelli wrote:Dillon, the alleles for darker skin, hair and eyes tend to be dominant over the alleles for the lighter types, that's why people agree that the majority of the population may end up beige one day

So you’re one of the brown ones as well?

Bora Bora wrote:Hey BM, do you have a Warnakulasuriya Patabendige Ushantha Joseph Chaminda Vaas on the dole? How about Amunugama Rajapakse Rajakaruna Abeykoon Panditha Wasalamudiyanse Ralahamilage Rajitha Krishantha Bandara Amunugama (Born: 22 April 1969, Mawanella)? You may want to check on Sahibzaha Mohammad Shahid Khan Afridi.

We have a Keith Vaas Bora, he doesn't claim the dole but is a drain on the taxpayer, none the less, he's a brown politician, dodgy as hell
As I say we don't have the Asian problem in my part of the country so I'm not that familiar with the names you have provided. I'll run them past my fraud contact at Manchester City Council. I hope it doesn't sent the computer system into meltdown.

I think I asked in another topic once, why is everybody called Mohammed?



-- Sun Jul 03, 2011 11:04 pm --

Dillon wrote:

kanelli wrote:Dillon, the alleles for darker skin, hair and eyes tend to be dominant over the alleles for the lighter types, that's why people agree that the majority of the population may end up beige one day

So you’re one of the brown ones as well?

I wonder if Mr K is of the brown persuasion?

shafique wrote:MCL - the point I was specifically addressing when referring to Morris and Diamond, was the issue of racial differences as a reason for differing levels of technological or even sociological development.

Morris deals with this in Chpt 1 - 'Before East and West' (see pg 60 and 80, for example). We're all Homo Sapiens and he makes the point that in large groups, all humans are alike - regardless of where they come from. (His big-thing-point is that social differences are due to geography - and I think the argument is well made.)

Diamond also debunks the 'genetic'/'racial' explanations for differences in civilisations. Shafique

Most genetists make it pretty clear that there are genetic differences between various races. For instance he consequences of ignoring these so-called "racial" population factors were underscored recently with the announcements by researchers at the University of Wisconsin that they had turned human embryonic stem cells into blood cells needed for bone marrow transplants for patients with leukemia or other cancers. However not all populations would benefit equally from such research. Such pathbreaking advancements are surprisingly held back by something as primitive as race and genes. Indigenous populations from different parts of the world all have their own genetic compositions which needs to be factored in during research.

shafique wrote:As for how the West will handle the power shift to the East - to me, it is a big unknown. In the past the shifts in power have tended to be characterised by wars. It's clear to me that China will be the pre-eminent superpower pretty soon (earlier than I was predicting 5 years ago), and I think India's economic might will continue to grow... interesting times ahead I think.

(I find it quaint that there are some that think the 'West' is somehow not going to meet the fate of previous empires. But it is a valid point of view.. )

At a grand scale though, the pendulum of economic and military might swinging to China and India are just a restoration of the 'natural order' of things. The power lies where the resources are - mineral and intellectual.

Cheers,
Shafique

This is a different age. The world has learnt to co-exists. If the world hadn't then immigration wouldn't have been a phenomenon. I hope that India and China continue to grow, for the wellbeing of their own people. I hope the West too continues to grow for the well being of their own people. And all of it is achievable without stepping on the others feet. Unless food resources, energy demands etc etc impact the functioning of certain powers, the world should be alrit. Technology will hopefully take us away from dependence on fossil fuels. Food security should be each countries on prerogative. And since intellect is freely flowing everything else can be taken care off in-house. So all of this talk of shift of power, western dominance etc etc is nothing but hyperbole.
For matters of pride if GDP figures and growth figures are all that matter then surely with the with west going through a demographic shift, the growth for now shall be accorded to BRIC nations. But I think that in terms of infrastructure, science and research the west had done enough to ward off any troubles that may come their way.
What ails the west more than anything else are global corporations hell bent on world domination. These corporations hand in glove with politicos continue to shape policies which may have an adverse impact on the local populations. The Greek debt crisis for instance is a classic example. Another is America's love for illegals mainly to provide cheap labor and to prop up politicians vote banks. Such policies will ultimately be detrimental to the west. Otherwise they should be just fine. Don't expect any major shift

MCL - interesting that you think the shift of dominance to the East is hyperbole. I don't.

The shift of power from British Empire's pre-eminence Westward to the USA was very real - as were the declines of previous world powers. One interesting characteristic of Empires on the wane is the shift in them being net creditors to the world to becoming net debtors to the world.

From what I've read and studied, the racial differences emanating from genes don't explain the shifting patterns of economic and political dominance - Morris et al show that these can be explained by enviromental factors.

When the Chinese and Indians were the most advanced nations in the world and Europe was a considered a barbaric back-water, the difference in genes relating to eye colour etc weren't the reasons why Indians and Chinese were technologically so much ahead of their European cousins. Ditto post industrial revolution and the same will apply again when China overtakes the USA in pretty much every measure (give it a few more decades - they are already the biggest manufacturer, 2nd largest economy..)

Former superpowers retain some of their past glories - Greece, Rome, Spain, Portugal, Turkey and Great Britain (etc)- but they all declined.

But then again - perhaps 'this time it is different'. Historically, though, 'this time it is different' hardly ever is.

Cheers,
Shafique

Bethsmum wrote:

symmetric wrote:@Herve .. You're a freak

I see you haven't addressed my reply Sym, and still name calling I see.

Herve isn't a freak sym. He's a hero.

Perhaps for the same reason why you didn't address my reply to you in your Iphone & blackberry thread.
However, I'm not into this childish attitude.

Bethsmum wrote: Sym, I don't hold grudges and I certainly don't hold any grudge against you, I'm pleased you saw the error of your ways and don't hate Israelis anymore.

But you clearly stated the following ..

Bethsmum wrote: Sym, While I appreciate the new Sym, I haven't forgotten your past stance of 'Lets kill all Israelis'.

I'm sorry, but if you can't forget others previous mistakes, then you're a person who hold grudges.
If you don't hold any grudges, then you need to let go (and forget) any past mistakes of others, instead of using as a token and bringing it up continuously.

Bethsmum wrote: You are right, I have never said death to anyone, on this forum, nor in real life. I don't hate Muslims nor anyone (except my daughter's husband), I just have a problem seeing where you all come from sometimes.

You clearly fail to realise that we Muslims come from DIFFERENT backgrounds, and your attitude of judging others have went far away to an extent that you judge all Muslims regardless their backgrounds, which is extremely ignorant. It's as ignorant as categorizing all Europeans as "the Christians" and then judging all of them negatively.

You might not be using words like "kill them all", but your hatred/hostility towards Muslims is very obvious that you can't let go any chance without throwing ugly comments, and personally I try to avoid clashing with you, as I try to communicate with you as per your own rules.

So you got a problem with our religion?
You need to FIX it. Just like how I was encouraged by everyone to FIX my issue with Jews.
And believe me, it feels really good to neglect all this hostility and hatred.

Isn't this is your rule

Bethsmum wrote:People are entitled to express their views, whether you agree with them or not.

So while you express your hostile views towards Muslim people, I did my best to avoid objecting on ur views.
But while I viewd EH, FD, and Herve as idiots, you jumped, judged, and objected + gave a lecture in ethics enforcing your views on me, trying to make me feel bad about myself.

Let me ask you, how ethical it is to call the Aborigines ugly buggers? Read your own words.

Bethsmum wrote: think you may be refering to my picture of a native aborigine. I took a lot of stick for that Zonker, for calling them the ugliest people around. Apparantly I'm shallow I still think they are ugly buggers.

I really DISLIKE digging, and cutting/pasting others previous posts to prove them wrong because I believe no one is perfect, but I also dislike it when you act like a lawless police women judging everyone on the forum and lecturing them with ethics & morals.
I was raised to learn that beauty is from within (beauty of spirit), & that looks fade. I'm not shallow, & I wouldn't want to post extreme harsh comments calling the aborigines the ugliest people on planet.

Conclusion:

1) I ignored your comments to reduce the tense, and to to avoid clashing with you.

2) You're too judgmental towards others, but you don't want others to judge you nor judge each other.

3) You're hostile towards Muslims. I suggest you elaborate more in order to approach terms of understanding.

the white race is not heading for extinction, here, i just ended the thread

general_A wrote:the white race is not heading for extinction, here, i just ended the thread

Well done general!

@sym, what ever you say!

shafique wrote:My agreement does indeed extend to his statement about some ethnic groups 'breeding like rabbits' - can't argue with the fact that not all families are of the same size. Observant Catholics are one group of immigrants, for example.

But you may remember I once referred to the white underclass in the UK.. babies are a way of getting more social benefit for many of them too. They may be the saviour of the white race.

I agree with your last statement that distinguishes between extinction and being a minority. I don't see what the fuss is about - embrace the change!

Funny thing is you'd be throwing a hissy fit if anyone said Muslims (are they an ethnic group?) are breeding like rodents like you did earlier in the thread when I said ethnic groups are not equal to each other (and you listed some books by authors who aren't geneticists that did not address what I actually said).

Me thinks your 'telling it like it is' ends when whites aren't the butt of someone's joke.

But hey, perhaps your inability to take healthy criticism of your coreligionists and of non-white people stems from your inferiority complex?

Dillon wrote:

kanelli wrote:Dillon, the alleles for darker skin, hair and eyes tend to be dominant over the alleles for the lighter types, that's why people agree that the majority of the population may end up beige one day

So you’re one of the brown ones as well?

Partially - have white skin, but brown eyes and brown hair.

Bethsmum wrote:

general_A wrote:the white race is not heading for extinction, here, i just ended the thread

Well done general!

@sym, what ever you say!

doesnt take tens of pages to answer a simple question now does it

general_A wrote:

Bethsmum wrote:

general_A wrote:the white race is not heading for extinction, here, i just ended the thread

Well done general!

@sym, what ever you say!

doesnt take tens of pages to answer a simple question now does it

All those wasted words general and you nailed it one post! LOL!

@BM cheers to that

general_A wrote:@BM cheers to that

Amen.

shafique wrote:MCL - interesting that you think the shift of dominance to the East is hyperbole. I don't.

The shift of power from British Empire's pre-eminence Westward to the USA was very real - as were the declines of previous world powers. One interesting characteristic of Empires on the wane is the shift in them being net creditors to the world to becoming net debtors to the world.

From what I've read and studied, the racial differences emanating from genes don't explain the shifting patterns of economic and political dominance - Morris et al show that these can be explained by enviromental factors.

When the Chinese and Indians were the most advanced nations in the world and Europe was a considered a barbaric back-water, the difference in genes relating to eye colour etc weren't the reasons why Indians and Chinese were technologically so much ahead of their European cousins. Ditto post industrial revolution and the same will apply again when China overtakes the USA in pretty much every measure (give it a few more decades - they are already the biggest manufacturer, 2nd largest economy..)

Former superpowers retain some of their past glories - Greece, Rome, Spain, Portugal, Turkey and Great Britain (etc)- but they all declined.

But then again - perhaps 'this time it is different'. Historically, though, 'this time it is different' hardly ever is.

Offcourse it's hyperbole Shafique. I'm talking co-existence, and you keep bring up decline of supremacy, GDP, empires etc etc.

Don't you think it's fantastic that China and India are doing well? These two countries both hold populations in excess of a billion....is'nt it but obvious GDP levels in these countries will rise? The west not only has a smaller population but they're also seemingly confronted with a demographic crisis of sorts. People who historically had no access to food and water can now live in hope of a better future...and that's brilliant.
And that is pretty much all there is to it. Surely Asia will have more bargaining power on the international table. All in all I think that international co-existance is very much the future.

So then are all races equal? Concerning matters of intelligence, we all have an IQ quotient right???
But
The argument posted by the initial poster was along the lines that indigenous populations in Europe and the historical population In America are on the decline and will soon be outnumbered. How then have you drawn an analogy between a demographic problem (read OP) and as issue concerning racial supremacy or whatever???
I debated that each group of people have to have their own homelands. Medicine is making fairly obvious that people across different countries have different genetic compositions. Medicine apart culturally too it's pointless being a minority in your own land. That is what I thought was the crux of the argument Shafique.
On matters concerning a new found industrial revolution, rising GDP growths of BRIC nations, historical shifts of power etc etc I might agree with you. But I just think that it is irrelevant to this argument. I think you start another thread on the subject, conversation and debate on it would be fantastic.

Misery Called Life wrote:Offcourse it's hyperbole Shafique. I'm talking co-existence, and you keep bring up decline of supremacy, GDP, empires etc etc.

Erm - I've also been talking about co-existence after the decline. I think that America won't disappear - it will just become like other former Empires that went into decline - eg Britain, Rome, Greece, Persia etc.

Misery Called Life wrote:Don't you think it's fantastic that China and India are doing well?

Yes. I agree with the reasons why they will continue to grow - it is a return to the natural order that relates to physical resources, and also an order that prevailed for much of history.

Misery Called Life wrote:So then are all races equal? Concerning matters of intelligence, we all have an IQ quotient right???

Yes, from what I've read all races are indeed equal. Given the same environment and resources, they would achieve the same results. Nurture rather than nature.

Misery Called Life wrote:But
The argument posted by the initial poster was along the lines that indigenous populations in Europe and the historical population In America are on the decline and will soon be outnumbered. How then have you drawn an analogy between a demographic problem (read OP) and as issue concerning racial supremacy or whatever???

Racial superiority was raised by other posters in subsequent posts - I have addressed the issue of whether 'whites' would become extinct from my perspective, and have since posted on the belief of racial differences in abilities. (Pointing out two books which tackle the scientific evidence on whether differences in ecomonic/social achievements around the world are linked to race rather than environment).

Misery Called Life wrote:I debated that each group of people have to have their own homelands. Medicine is making fairly obvious that people across different countries have different genetic compositions. Medicine apart culturally too it's pointless being a minority in your own land. That is what I thought was the crux of the argument Shafique.

Sure there are genetic differences amongst Homo-Sapiens. It is perfectly valid to postulate a theory that people with red hair are less intelligent than those with black or blond hair - and indeed one could come up with studies that perhaps show this. Some may believe this theory, others may not.

My point is that those who have looked into the difference between social advancement and race/genetics, do not conclude that the differences lie in the genes.

Misery Called Life wrote:In matters concerning a new found industrial revolution, rising GDP growths of BRIC nations, historical shifts of power etc etc I might agree with you. But I just think that it is irrelevant to this argument. I think you start another thread on the subject, conversation and debate on it would be fantastic.

I think you'll find that my post about the myth of racial differences was in response to other posts which were putting forward this myth. I guess I could be accused of not starting a new thread to tackle this canard - but in my defence, I did only link to the two books in that first post.

Happy to discuss (in this or another thread) this further. We may actually agree more than we disagree, it seems.

Cheers,
Shafique

Note to people with some working brain cells, two books one personally selects to skim through =//= all people who've 'looked at the evidence'.

Calling the opposing position a 'myth', no matter how often one repeats it, does not magically make it so.

Avoiding the science and posting * substance less* replies does not refute the hard evidence.

shafique wrote:Yes. I agree with the reasons why they will continue to grow - it is a return to the natural order that relates to physical resources, and also an order that prevailed for much of history.
Sure there are genetic differences amongst Homo-Sapiens. It is perfectly valid to postulate a theory that people with red hair are less intelligent than those with black or blond hair - and indeed one could come up with studies that perhaps show this. Some may believe this theory, others may not.

My point is that those who have looked into the difference between social advancement and race/genetics, do not conclude that the differences lie in the genes.

Yea your probably right about the fact that no enough has been published regarding differences in genes/race/genetics. I don't read a whole lot on the subject, my sources for what they are worth are generally family sources. Where we come from, I'm the black sheep the only one who's ventured into finance. The rest are all into medical research and we even run a stem cell bank (in infacy though). From what I gathered there are valid differences, in people and genetics. But since I'm no expert on the subject I'll leave it at that until I have more matter on subject.

shafique wrote:I think you'll find that my post about the myth of racial differences was in response to other posts which were putting forward this myth. I guess I could be accused of not starting a new thread to tackle this canard - but in my defence, I did only link to the two books in that first post.

Happy to discuss (in this or another thread) this further. We may actually agree more than we disagree, it seems.

Naa I don't see why on principle we need to disagree. In fact I love ur opinions and posts on certain matters.

MCL - it is an interesting subject - and I certainly don't claim to be an expert. What is good about the two books I recommended, is that they do tackle the subject and look at the evidence and reach the conclusion I listed.

There are genetic differences within races and also between races. There are certainly genetic traits that have evolved to suit the climates - eg those adapted to living at high altitudes, those with sickle cell anaemia etc.

There are also studies which show that culture and environment (rather than genes) affect performance on IQ tests (and arguably measure one form of intelligence).

But looking specifically at whether genetic differences between races explains differences in social development (or intelligence, per se) has shown that the drivers for differences are not genetics, but rather the environment. It is a bonus to me that this coincides with my revulsion of racist/supremacist theories - but then again, I'm just reporting what Morris and Diamond have written on the subject (and they refer to the available research).

(BTW- I am in a minority in my family too, I'm the only one in finance)

Cheers,
Shafique

Intelligence is evenly split between environment and heredity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Just like athleticism, ethnic groups have advantages over others in different forms of mental ability, such as mathematics or visuospatial ability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

event horizon wrote:Intelligence is evenly split between environment and heredity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Just like athleticism, ethnic groups have advantages over others in different forms of mental ability, such as mathematics or visuospatial ability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

For that matter just this morning, was having Lebanese breakfast with a colleague. And she goes, I love this stuff, but i can't eat it at home cos my husband is allergic to this food and it's odor. Infact so sensitive is he that it could even be fatal. She went on it's called G58 or something(for the life of me I can't remember) it's basically some missing enzymes. Then she say's something really interesting...she went on to say this condition is only prevalent amongst Arabs! Makes you think now don't it?

I remember when James Watson got in a lot of trouble for his comments about race and Africa not too long ago.

But I guess some people look to sources with which they agree from the start, leading them to believe the debate on race and intelligence or heredity and intelligence is fully environmental (apparently everyone forgets about people with disabilities) and the opposing view has long been 'debunked' and fallen into the trash bin of other un-PC beliefs.