search results matching tag: intellectual

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (163)     Sift Talk (23)     Blogs (10)     Comments (1000)   

Tolkien Explains Why Not Just Ride The Eagles

Trump praises Putin's invasion of Ukraine as 'genius'

luxintenebris says...

pure hate porn.

vichy americans.

back bending, soul-selling, truth denying, exploitative snake-oilers.

but jesse's mom still loves him. doesn't agree w/him and wishes he'd listen more - but still cares for her little boy.

all these types - fox, the blaze, daily wire, & ilk - have put money ahead of country, fellow citizens or personal honor. purveyors of intellectual stupidity. like Amway of the airwaves.

door-to-door whores.

so don't listen to them.

BSR said:

Follow up: Fox News host rushes to do clean-up for Trump after he gushes over 'genius' Putin.

"While talking with fellow host Jesse Watters, Hegseth dismissed criticism of the former president for gushing about Putin by claiming he was only doing it to get a reaction out of the American media."

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-putin-2656771978/

Americans Tell NBC, “Blown Away” By Bidenflation,

bobknight33 says...

If you think this is Trumps fault, think what you want?

But
This is on Biden, commander in chief. It is his job to steer the ship. To correct the direction of the nation.
What has he done to correct this? NOTHING, except more spending , making this worse.

Biden use by date has long expired. He has no leadership ability, He cant take questions He is kept from media and public for fear on looking tool old and too slow and unable to speak intellectually. His days are in the past.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

I Changed Astronomy Forever. He Won the Nobel Prize for It.

newtboy says...

Kind of, but the head of department is morally and ethically obligated to make note of the subordinate who made the actual discovery or breakthrough and usually shares the prize at least if it doesn’t go directly to the discovery maker alone. This is especially true when the head misinterprets and discards the data and denies any discovery was made until the discoverer, on their own, forms a hypothesis, tests it, and repeats it, all without the head of department’s involvement.

In this case, one person made the discovery and the department head dismissed it, then that subordinate on her own continued her investigation and formed her own hypothesis, tested and verified it, and only then her department head became convinced, then took ALL credit for the discovery with no mention of her. That is NOT how scientific teams work.

This wasn’t just her discovery, she figured out what it was too…her hypothesis and her testing, her repeating the discovery, almost certainly her writing it up. If she were a man, she definitely would have gotten credit for both the discovery and the hypothesis, and for confirming her hypothesis. She might not have been given the “prize” individually, but she would have definitely gotten the credit and shared in the accolades. (I think a male in the same position would have shared the prize at a minimum, and had the department head claimed credit as they did here, would have publicly disgraced the department head by proving they not only had nothing to do with the discovery, they had dismissed it when shown and added nothing at all to the hypothesis or testing it, and they would have been drummed out of the scientific community for plagiarism and theft of intellectual property).

When he dismissed her findings completely, he removed himself from the discovery and she became group leader of her own separate project. She deserves both prizes, both monetary awards, a public apology from the man who stole her work without giving her credit, and a serious civil judgement against him for any bonus, advancement, raise, accolades, or paid engagements he received based on his lie that he discovered pulsars. That’s her money that he stole.

vil said:

OK I will take a risk on this one. Every scientific breakthrough is supported by scientific personnel who run experiments and collect data. The head of the laboratory or institution gets to interpret the data and get the Nobel Prize. That is how teams work in science.

Its even in the video, getting the discovery discovered is a lot of tedious work, someone has to find the anomalous signal, that is great, someone else then gets to state a hypothesis about what it means, which when it proves to be right gives them the prize. Seems fair. Even if its just one on one student and professor, unless the student comes up with a fundamental concept, just noticing an anomaly does not make a Nobel Prize laureate of the student. Even if his line of search is originally against the opinion of the professor.

Now arguably in this case Ms. Bell made a bigger contribution than just collecting data and if you juxtapose that with how women were treated back then, its a nice story. But if she were a man in the same position there would be no Nobel Prize either. And possibly no compensating prize years later.

And yes she deserves her prize, I believe.

Psaki Shows How To Handle "People Are Saying" Questions

StukaFox says...

The next shutdown needs to be done to assholes who make an inflammatory statement, but proceed it with "I have to ask the question", as if it's an honest intellectual search for truth and not the kinda shit that got Julius Streicher short-dropped at Nuremberg.

$55,000 for 5,000 votes

Why Was the Islamic Golden Age of Science… Golden?

vil says...

Last names as a way to determine ethnic diversity, lost me there.

Cool though, that makes my sister latin american.

Too bad I am stuck with a name thats probably German in origin.

Diversity is fine. It was the tolerance of the society to entertain the notion that feeding a bunch of good for nothing intellectuals was a noble idea that made a golden age possible. Also the possibility to travel and communicate, the spread of information was helpful. Language barriers came down. That tolerance ended around 1250. Muslim lands were still ethnically diverse after that, but no more tolerance for science.

So tolerance of different ideas, customs, religions, foreigners and races seems more important than attempting to induce diversity artificially.

Tolerance naturally leads to diversity - you can see this in areas like scientific teams, hi-tech companies, or top sports teams. If you want the best people you arrive at not evaluating their race, but their abilities. That is if the society around you lets you do that.

My friends son just spent 6 months working in a chemical lab in Sweden. Met few Swedes, mostly worked with people from all over the world. So he helped with a Swedish project, he can now go back to work on his own project and he knows all these people from around the world who work on similar stuff. No one gives a damn about what ethnicity any of the people involved are or if the lab was "diverse". They all concentrate on the project. If a commision goes in and starts counting how many Laplandian scientists are filling a quota the scientists would show the (imaginary) commision their collective middle finger or just leave.

So i would argue that ethnically diverse scientific teams are not more succesful because they are diverse, they are more successful because they are open and tolerant (and that has led to their diversity).

Forcing diversity will not bring the same result.

Long? Sorry.

The unbearable lightness of being president.

vil says...

No, no bets, thank you. I thought this was a shining example of why Trump being president should bother people. He really is stupid and obnoxious and uneducated to that level.

I have a vague memory of 2016 Trump boasting that he could be very "presidential", was very clever, and had "the best words". What has that come to? This video basically.

Frankly at that time I was still convinced Obama was a puppet - a black intellectual fullfilling the role that a party needed fulfilled, a token black president. Retrospectively he was (is) a very intelligent, eloquent person excercising extreme self-control in the face of trolls like Bob. He was constantly walking a tightrope of trying to rebuff idiots without insulting them. And tried to promote some reasonable policies.

Trump could not summon the effort to self control, but mainly he does not understand why he should restrain himself. He is like a travesty show performer, as long as he is billed in this performance as "president" he can do anything, no matter how stupid, and there will be people cheering.

What intrigues me is that in the US tradition past presidents are given a "respected" status for life. Should be fun.

Let's talk about Trump going to the hospital....

newtboy says...

It happened, it was halted, it's happening again. As long as lower education is so disparate between mostly white and mostly black schools, it's proper. Revamp the education system so all high school graduates have the same educational opportunities, I would support removing it again, but we are moving the opposite direction. No link required, I explained....but from the link you provided....
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html

Did you read the link you provided about the one place supporting a day of absence? Evergreen? Their "day of absence" was 100% voluntary, not enforceable and not enforced, contrary to your claim.

The reporter chased out wasn't chased out, he was confronted, and he had left the media area to interrupt the event by "interviewing" people who didn't want to be interviewed in the middle of the event. Trump's campaign has adopted this tactic and added violence, and often physically assaulted reporters even when they comply and stay in the media area. This particular event was akin to a reporter jumping on stage and insisting the speaker let him interview him then and there, disrupting the sanctioned event.

Um....this was a discussion of why people would vote for Trump, not what's happening in Canada. That said, you can't expect a university to give a platform to a person who would use it to degrade and denigrate the university and it's policies. I wouldn't expect a religious school to host atheistic pro-life lectures, and I wouldn't expect publicly funded universities to host anti inclusion lectures.

Duh...your alleged "whiteness" class was not defining whiteness as inherently negative, it was this....
CSRE 136: White Identity Politics (AFRICAAM 136B, ANTHRO 136B)
Pundits proclaim that the 2016 Presidential election marks the rise of white identity politics in the United States. Drawing from the field of whiteness studies and from contemporary writings that push whiteness studies in new directions, this upper-level seminar asks, does white identity politics exist? How is a concept like white identity to be understood in relation to white nationalism, white supremacy, white privilege, and whiteness? We will survey the field of whiteness studies, scholarship on the intersection of race, class, and geography, and writings on whiteness in the United States by contemporary public thinkers, to critically interrogate the terms used to describe whiteness and white identities. Students will consider the perils and possibilities of different political practices, including abolishing whiteness or coming to terms with white identity. What is the future of whiteness? n*Enrolled students will be contacted regarding the location of the course. And it was cancelled in 2016-17. Don't be dishonest, it will change my responses.

Not sure why you made up this falsely alleged definition of racism that appears nowhere in the definitions or class descriptions you linked, but you did. Calling bullshit....Again.

Critical Race Theory (7016): This course will consider one of the newest intellectual currents within American Legal Theory -- Critical Race Theory. Emerging during the 1980s, critical race scholars made many controversial claims about law and legal education -- among them that race and racial inequality suffused American law and society, that structural racial subordination remained endemic, and that both liberal and critical legal theories marginalized the voices of racial minorities. Course readings will be taken from both classic works of Critical Race Theory and newer interventions in the field, as well as scholarship criticizing or otherwise engaging with Critical Race Theory from outside or at the margins of the field. Meeting dates: The class will meet 7:15PM to 9:15PM on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (January 7, 8, and 9), and the following Monday and Tuesday (January 13 and 14). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Not anti white/pro minority/white=evil....but an examination of how laws as written and enforced may (or may not) be an example of racial injustice codified in law, whether by accident or intent. Again, you misrepresent the facts to pretend a class that examines the roll of race in law is a racist class teaching whites are bad and blacks are good.

If everyone BUT Asains do poorly because they aren't offered the same opportunities to excell, then yes, we need to step in to UPGRADE the opportunities of everyone else, that doesn't translate into downgrading the opportunities Asains are offered. Derp. This bullshit is the same racist trope the anti equality side has used for years, it's just bullshit. Asians aren't penalized for being competent at math nor for being Asian....neither were whites, which was V 1.0 of that same argument.

Identity politics are on both sides, played hard by the right too, to the detriment of society.

Affirmative action got national pushback from the racist right the day it was described as a plan, and constantly since.

It seems you may be confused by morons who would tell you racism is dead, reverse racism is out of control. When white women start being lynched by black mobs and blacks get a free pass for breaking the law, come back and try again. Until then, you sound like a bully whining about getting a time out for punching a smaller kid because they're a different race and proclaiming the whole system is unfair to white kids because you had a minor consequence forced on you.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy
-Including race as a determining factor in your admission score
as a 'liberal' ideal
This IS happening broadly, link to how and arguments for why it is 'good'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/10/03/harvard-beat-an-effort-end-its-use-race-factor-admissions-what-will-supreme-court-do/
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2019/10/01/471085/5-reasons-support-affirmative-action-college-admissions/

-Enforcement of a race based "day of absence" where based on your race you were to be 'kicked off' campus for the day
Specifically the day of absence was at evergreen:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_State_College#2017_protests
Similarly reverse racist attitudes though are common enough, like chasing out a student journalist here for simply covering an event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kVGtqp7usw

-"deplatforming" people for having dissenting opinions
Jordan Peterson is the biggest example, but my local uni has also banned pro-life student clubs too, so maybe I'm a little Canada biased on this?

-The entire circle-jerk of intersectionalism:
---"whiteness" needs to be defined as something inherently negative
Here's the Standford course on it if you or your parents wanna enrol:
https://explorecourses.stanford.edu/search?view=catalog&filter-coursestatus-Active=on&page=0&catalog=&q=CSRE+32SI%3A+Whiteness&collapse=

---"Racism" needs to redefined as not simply racial prejudice, but racial prejudice PLUS power(you know, so only white people can be racist under the new definition)
Likewise offered at Stanford, unless this is the lone critical race theory course that doesn't champion the above prejudice+power definition.
https://law.stanford.edu/courses/critical-race-theory/

---"systemic racism" getting defined as anything with unequal outcomes, so if asian students do too well in math it must mean the system is favouring them and we need to step in


And I'm out of time,

but seriously I'm a little baffled this was remotely controversial? Identity politics is a game the left has been playing at HARD for at minimum the decades since Affirmative Action was launched. The notion that the idea would eventually get national level push back should have been easy to see coming.

Trump’s Vast And Ongoing Project To Steal The Election

newtboy says...

Oh you intellectually challenged, lying, ethic and moral free pedophilia supporter. That's absolutely not true.

The FBI and Homeland security say unambiguously that right wing extremists are the fastest growing and most dangerous terrorist organizations in America, not the left, and by far the most active. THEY are the ones starting fires, shooting police, and sending bombs and powders through the mail dozens of times, not lefties. Boogaloo boys alone eclipse all left wing destruction in deaths and damage, and they're only one of dozens.

Try saying something pro democrat at a Trump event, see how much they love free speech then, if you live. You're so infantile, exaggerating any left wing interuption to an attack on the constitution but right wing murders are nothing burgers. You must be morbidly obese eating three to four burgers a day.

Um....is Obama still president, or did he peacefully walk out in Jan 17? Did he ever once even threaten a coup like Trump does daily? Nope, not once.
So moronic, infantile, and self reflective Bob. It's blatant to everyone you're projecting hard.

bobknight33 said:

Republicans aren't the ones burning down shit, banning free speech on campus, creating violence.

99% of violence last 3+ years s from the left refusal to acknowledge a peaceful transfer to power because Hillary lost.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

bcglorf says...

Well, we’ve finally found an area where I lean more left/liberal than you do.

I hate how little evidence seems required to class someone ‘alt-right’ and equally how little effort is needed to re-class anyone ‘alt-right’ as a fascist, racist and nazi. It’s beyond intellectual laziness, and stinks of modern day witch huntery sometimes.

For the video here though, I can even hypothetically cede that all too you, and lets just pretend the guy in the video is 100% a committed, public Hitler enthusiast.

Even then, if all he wants to do is stand in the street with a sign, as he is in the video, then I lean left/liberal enough that I still believe you then meet him with words and counter protest, reveal his ideas as the vile poison they are. You do NOT get to use force and violence to chase him off by shoving him out, physically making him leave, and trying to steal his sign or assault him.

If he crosses the line of messages that promote violence, then the police get to use force to bring him in front of a judge and charge him. Angry mobs crushing dissenting opinion though is NOT the way forwards.

newtboy said:

It took me two seconds to figure out this was fake or at best a total misrepresentation, and under two minutes to find plenty of evidence to that effect.

They only look bad when viewed totally out of context. This was edited to create a false narrative that some random innocent meek individual supporting rational discourse was attacked by a violent gang of anti free speech liberals, which is asinine and a blatant lie. He's a professional racist instigators defending racist ideologies at a racist propaganda center being protested, not free speech but his freedom to espouse racial hatred unopposed and uncontradicted.
I'm sad this bullshit is still getting passed around without explanation three plus years later.

I bet if we saw the five minutes before this conveniently edited video started, no one could question them calling him a Nazi and shouting him away, since he is in fact one, one who actively and publicly works to legitimize Nazism and other racist ideologies...he is a long time professional public aggressor and race baiter.

He has every right to discuss his ideas, the rest of us have every right to vocally disagree. When his ideas are actually supporting racial violence, it's pretty disingenuous to complain when they spark some "verbal violence".

Alaskan Glacier calving Columbia w/ 200 foot high shooter

moonsammy says...

I'm immensely concerned about climate change, and can absolutely see being upset about the video. At the same time, were I present for nature exhibiting its power in a manner like this, I'm sure I'd be woo-hooing along with all the other yokels. Pretty sure witnessing something this (literally) awesome would short-circuit all of the more intellectual parts of my brain for a little while.

cloudballoon said:

Am I the only one disturbed and concerned by the underlying cause of the calving than repeatedly yelling "Oh my God woohoo!" like I'm watching a blockbuster disaster CGI movie? It's not "entertaining"...

Feet To The Fire!

SFOGuy says...

Administration's current budget (before today's emergency declaration) didn't have the budget to pay. That's why he had the deer in the headlights look. I mean, if I give him credit for having some intellectual process behind this. Of course, this is the guy whose agency released a faulty test to the states (faulty reagent) and did not release authority to the states or independent labs until today (along with FDA)---he kept trying to hold the authority and center for all tests in Atlanta; which had worked with Ebola and Zika. But; he didn't understand or was badly served by his lieutenants in understanding that this virus and occasion were different. I hope he hasn't killed a million people with a delay.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

lurgee jokingly says...

In a new interview, Grammy Award winner Linda Ronstadt compared President Trump to Adolf Hitler, saying that "if you read the history" it's "exactly the same."

Ronstadt said there are "great parallels" between Trump and Hitler.

"The intelligentsia of Berlin and the literati and all the artists were just busy doing their thing. Hitler rose to power. There were a lot of chances to stop him, and they didn't speak out," she said. "The industrial complex thought they could control him once they got him in office, and of course he was not controllable."

"By the time he got established, he put his own people in place and stacked the courts and did what he had to do to consolidate his power," Ronstadt said, referring to the Nazi leader. "And we got Hitler, and he destroyed Germany. He destroyed centuries of intellectual history forward and backward."

"If you read the history, you won't be surprised. It's exactly the same," Ronstadt replied. "Find a common enemy for everybody to hate. I was sure that Trump was going to get elected the day he announced, and I said it's gonna be like Hitler, and the Mexicans are the new Jews. And sure enough that's what he delivered."

Ronstadt has been a vocal critic of Trump. Earlier this year, she said she didn’t “want to be in the same room with him” when she learned she would be honored at the Kennedy Center.

“I don’t think he would dare show his face. He doesn’t know anything about art. He knows about money,” said Ronstadt, who received the National Medal of Arts in 2014.

Trump ultimately decided not to attend the award ceremony this year, but Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did make an appearance. Ronstadt swiped at Pompeo during her speech after he cited her 1975 track “When Will I Be Loved.”

Ronstadt reportedly said after taking the microphone, “I’d like to say to Mr. Pompeo, who wonders when he’ll be loved, it’s when he stops enabling Donald Trump.”



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon