Hidden Figures, A Movie About a Fake Story?

>>79062823
Well women and minorities can't do anything so obviously

bait

File: IMG_0761.jpg (38KB, 450x320px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 450x320px

>>79062823
>Breitbart

>>79062823
They severely exaggerated the importance of the three niggers and the amount of melanin in their skin

>>79062896
Point me to a unbiased news site

File: image_10.jpg (166KB, 960x905px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 960x905px

NOBODY HERE HAS WATCHED THE MOVIE

NOBODY HERE HAS WATCHED THE MOVIE


NOBODY HERE HAS WATCHED THE MOVIE


NOBODY HERE HAS WATCHED THE MOVIE

>>79062917
> something like an unbiased news side exists

>>79062823
>read an article on Breitbart
faggot

>>79062932
>Watching sjw propaganda

>>79062948
It does exist, but since it probably doesn't conform to your worldviews, you will hate it

>>79062823
There are no true stories in Hollywood. You read Brietbart

>>79062823
>Breitbart
lmao maybe, just maybe that's why

File: e9d.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>79062823
>Is this true?

File: 1486016054731.gif (981KB, 342x239px) Image search: [Google]

981KB, 342x239px

>>79062823
>it's a "bait /pol/tards" thread with the three things they can't stand: smart, black women.
>revisionist history when?

Yes, they were so desperate for the race angle they created 2 imaginary racist characters despite the source material being about how she suffered no racism.

>Black girl Main Character was a real character?
Yes
>She helped the space program team?
Yes
>She helped it in the way portrayed in the movie?
No
>All the other female characters are real?
No

File: 1476947360459.png (92KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 400x400px

>>79062823
>Breitbart

File: 43541.jpg (931KB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

931KB, 2688x1520px

>>79062823

>read an article on Breitbart

>>79062917
This persons vote cancels out my reasoned well informed vote. Thanks op

File: 1484280518235.jpg (103KB, 969x969px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 969x969px

>>79062823
>read an article on Breitbart

File: Katherine Johnson - NASA.jpg (49KB, 599x532px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 599x532px

>>79063034
Yeah, look at this proud full-blooded afrikang womyn

>>79062917
there's a difference between being biased, yet have journalistic standards and apply internal fact-checking, and then clickbait propaganda with an obvious agenda like Breitbart.

>>79062932
You can read a wiki article to know the story is full of shit

File: 1475258277841.gif (2MB, 356x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 356x200px

You can stop samecucking any time now

>>79063118
Yeah read something with integrity like the NYT or WaPo

>>79063118
Doesn't answer the question, friend

File: 1485939730475.png (406KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 500x434px

>>79063065
>this tired meme that her role was "le exaggerated" just to desperately claw at a true story that NASA confirms and three seconds on Google confirms
>being literally this desperate because blacks upset you that much where you have to take away their true stories
WEW, can't wait for the (you)s now. Almost guaranteed

>>79063118
You just described CNN

File: file.png (1MB, 1280x848px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x848px

>>79063114
she's black though. not even mixed. are you suggesting this person is white?

obama is whiter than her and you guys call him a nigger.

>>79063152
doesnt matter, youre still a dipshit

>>79063114
It's like you don't know how melanin works and you never met a black person

File: 1485973753408.png (52KB, 1280x549px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x549px

>>79062823
>and read an article on Breitbart

>>79063152
If it has to be in English, try one of these, but for God's stake stay away from the editorialsː

The Guardian
New York Times
Washington Post
The Economist
The Wall Street Journal
Der Spiegel (English)

They may have a slight progressive bias in the sense that most journalists tend to be leftists, but they all pride themselves on critical journalism and internal consistency, at least in the actual reporting. The editorials are trash, though.

>>79063151
Right, because everything they write is wrong. No matter what. Why cant they just be responsible journalists and redpill me on the Jewish globalist conspiracy or the cultural marxist takeover that Alex talks about. You know, that solid reporting.

I have never met a masculine white male Democrat voter in my entire fucking life

File: 14980793_1148139398554504_8466749409031796884_n.jpg (24KB, 958x515px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 958x515px

>>79063234
> NYT

>>79063234
Oh but anon, all remotely left journalists can't be trusted because blalh blah blah libcucks

>>79063255
You can't really be an alpha while calling yourself a "male feminist" and constantly virtue signaling

>>79063265
right, but election forecasts aren't actual reporting, and have never been.

>>79063255
Of course you didn't, you don't even get out of your basement.

>>79063265
How does bad or unexpected polling mean their journalism is all bad? You think polls are conducted in house and by the same people?

You should check these dubs.

>>79063255
I've never met a masculine conservative voter
Unless by masculine you mean obese, smelly, and uneducated, then yes

>>79063281
>caring about masculinity to others
Do you also refuse to cry because it's for pussies and measure dick sizes "just for fun bro"? Every uber-masculine person I have ever met has then gone off to suck a dick or turned out gay or in denial

>>79063282
>>79063299
Didn't they apologize for being biased and beg their readers not to cancel their subscriptions after the election?

>>79062990
>le npr meme
fuck off

>i don't like breitbart
>therefore everything on the site is false

>>79063348
And then they changed nothing about their """"reporting""""

>>79063392
>literally nothing wrong with NPR
You breitbart fags think what you peddle is news...

>>79063318
That one must have stung you, huh?

>>79062823
The true story is that the amerifat space program was almost exclusively the work of captured nazi scientists. They can't flat out admit that former SS officers got them to the moon, so they have to make shit up about 'muh stronk poc womun who dont need no white mans 2 spaec'

>>79063348
I have no clue about that. I would need a source. Still, polling is usually not done IN house at news networks. You all act like every single fucking poll was in on some conspiracy, when even Fox was polling Trump pretty low. Gee, it is almost like it was a surprise and less of "le ebin media conspiracy", like you retards think everything is.

>>79062932
I did last night senpai

>>79062823
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_Figures_(book)
this is the book. synopsis is light, to say the least.

you tell me if it's conjecture or they name some names.

>>79063348
I don't know, never heard of it. Feel free to post a source.

To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me. Journalists tend to be cosmopolitan and internationalist, the vast majority of them are obviously going to be anti-Trump.

But ask yourself this, will Breitbart ever apologize for their own coverage? If NYT actually did, that only further proves how much more of a serious paper they are than Breitbart.

>>79062823
Breitbart is more reliable than CNN so there has to be some truth to it

>>79063448
>make shit up
Everytime these Hidden Figures threads are made I should just play a stormfag bingo of the same ten things I read in these bait threads

Someone make a template please

File: 1482072533091.png (19KB, 805x531px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 805x531px

>been hearing some rumors and read an article on Breitbart

>>79063493
Retards genuinely believe this.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/07/german-police-quash-breitbart-story-of-mob-setting-fire-to-dortmund-church

>>79063493
>Breitbart is more reliable than CNN
Because of one election cycle? Kek. No. Nice meme though.

File: 1477791287007.jpg (18KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 250x241px

>>79063234
>but they all pride themselves on critical journalism and internal consistency

>>79063555
Well, they do.

>>79063493
I don't know any educated people that would bother with CNN, I certainly wouldn't.

But they are still lightyears ahead of Breitbart. That shit is intellectual poison.

>>79063501
My post is 100% factual. Sorry that facts trigger you.

File: 1437597603775.jpg (107KB, 613x533px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 613x533px

Notice that the critics of Breitbart's defense boils down to "lmao Breitbart"

Breitbart covers things that are uncomfortable to hear, to say the least, and proggies shut down.

>>79063477
>But ask yourself this, will Breitbart ever apologize for their own coverage? If NYT actually did, that only further proves how much more of a serious paper they are than Breitbart.
Why should they apologize for anything. The only thing they should do is if they print something false or libelous, and then they print a retraction. That's it. It's not their job to be concerned with the feels of people they cover, let alone people who read their articles.

>>79063449
>>79063477
> self-loathing leftists aren't even aware of this
> I'm supposed to believe their opinions on what are and aren't "non-biased newspapers"

> When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.

After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?

As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.

We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.

Sincerely,

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher

Dean Baquet, executive editor

>>79063522
How many times has CNN been caught straight out lying now?

>>79063522
Not to defend Breitbart, but the media right now is so politicized that not a single outlet is safe from lying. The guardian even has a meme on how retarded their editorial board is ("peak guardian"). So they might be right on this one, but next week they will say something equally retarded.

>>79063590
I don't think you really know what a fact is, but whatever you need to tell yourself.

>>79063555
You think Breitbart would have been contacted by Snowden or WikiLeaks? You think Breitbart would have uncovered Watergate?

You think Breitbart is ever going to win a Pulitzer?

Or are all these things just part of the liberal conspiracy?

File: 1438716622444.jpg (182KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1024x1024px

>>79063234
>but they all pride themselves on critical journalism and internal consistency, at least in the actual reporting
If you think the bulk of the articles are totally immune to the proggie newthink in the building, you're mistaken. They are however widespread papers and if you're in journalism, you're probably expected to know what they're printing. I don't read most of them because more often than not I get hit with a paywall, which is bullshit if I'm reading maybe one or two articles a week.

The editorials are where the Id of these people come out to play, and they're revealing to say the least.

>>79063649
Probably never?

>>79063668
>no argument
Well at least you can admit you're wrong. Sorry kid, better luck next time.

>>79063234
>but they all pride themselves on critical journalism and internal consistency

>>79063704
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_controversies

File: 1459103170884.png (64KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 200x200px

>>79063674
kek, im not even an amerifat so I don't care about your political shitflining, but its hilarious to see people so deluded they actually defend flatout propaganda machines

>>79063706
>burden of proof, what exactly is that? XD
Right, I'm wrong about an established recent historical person that NASA backs up entirely..it's me...

Bet you wouldn't have any problems if she was white. "What an endearing story"

File: 1485725087362.png (260KB, 483x368px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 483x368px

>>79063034
This post reminded me that leftists live in an alternate reality where everything is the opposite
>OP makes a very obvious thread to bait leftists
>gets 20 "lmao breitbart responses"
>delusional retard thinks this is a thread to bait /pol/tards
lmao

File: 16115010_824785807659316_7287510920600977687_n.jpg (38KB, 960x662px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 960x662px

>>79063704
Bait or delusion?

>>79063747
My post is 100% factual. Sorry that facts trigger you.

Feel free to continue shitposting, but it wont change history. Sorry kid, better luck next time.

>>79063592
> Why should Breitbart apologize?
Why should the New York Time? The criticism is bias. If the NYT is guilty of this, so is Breitbart times a million.
> Breitbart covers things that are uncomfortable to hear.
So do all these supposedly untrustworthy liberal papers.
>>79063593
They have the sort of journalistic integrity required to look inward and conduct internal criticism. Apparently that makes them worse than blatant propaganda.

>>79063649
Too many to count.

>>79063728
>CNN has been subject to allegations of attempting to influence viewers, as opposed to an unbiased approach to political journalism
This doesnt mean any of the "controversies" actually happened or were actual lies, friendo. Just means they were accused for the most part. Nothing substantial though. They had a bias during the election, but they never reported factually incorrect information.

>>79062846
German nazi war criminals working for the US military were a minority...

>>79063698
I literally admit the progressive bias in the post you are quoting, but you know, nice counter and all..

File: daafc365ab71fa0b2c3cc4f116b7446e.jpg (93KB, 565x800px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 565x800px

>>79063746
Yeah it's amazing how many people are defending this movie.
>libs actually think 3 black women out of hundreds of scientists were indispensable for sending a rocket to the moon

>>79063754
It is though...

File: breitbart-jerusalem-logo-640x480.png (21KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 640x480px

>breitbart

>>79063774
>My post is 100% factual.
You just keep repeating this without explaining why, at all...

Fuck off autist.

Armond White probably loves Breitbart and he said Hidden Figures was a good movie. Now what, /tv/?

>>79063754
clearly there are people in this world who are far enough away from my own standards of what constitutes journalism to take Breitbart at face value. If learning exactly what kind of reasoning is behind that requires my being baited, so be it. I can live with that.

>>79063775
> conduct internal criticism.
Only after their subscriptions dropped, not for the sake of journalistic integrity
> blatant propaganda.
Breitbart is right-leaning, but every mainstream news site is some sort of biased. Is >>79063760 propaganda too?

File: so rare.jpg (64KB, 414x613px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 414x613px

>8 more year of libtard butthurt

BEST, FUCKING, TIMELINE

>>79063760
She did though:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/donald-trump-inauguration-frank-sinatra-nancy-who-is-performing-when-is-it-watch-it-a7514721.html?amp

They show her tweets...

>>79063234
Every single one of those outlets lied about Trump's calls with Mexico and Australia. That was one day ago. Fuck off.

>>79063924
>thinking he'll even make it through the first year

Remember that time the CEO of Breitbart took donations from Donald Trump's fake charity, then used the website to push pro-Trump propaganda? Of course you don't remember, because you read fake news.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/23/1603508/-Steve-Bannon-created-a-non-partisan-charity-to-funnel-money-from-billionaires-to-Brietbart

>>79063760
>>79063799

really makes me think

File: salty.jpg (180KB, 573x729px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 573x729px

>>79063972

>>79063728
Jesus, the list just goes on and on. Absolutely brutal how anyone being critical of Israel gets shown the door.

>>79063919
You don't know whether they did it upon reflection or whether it was because of the subscriptions, that it clearly you projecting your own narrative unto it.

> Is this propaganda too?

I wouldn't touch CNN with disinfectant gloves to be begin with, so I honestly can't say. After having looked at their website, it seems to be pretty obvious anti-Trump propaganda. But I really must point out how ill-informed you are, if you think the choice is between only that one and Breitbart.

>>79063924
>frogposter
>reddit spacing
>reddit all caps meme
Back you go!

>>79063972
>D....dd..drumpf is done for this time!


yes and bernie can still win

>>79063989

Nancy Sinatra literally said it though
>>79063946

You don't get to just go "nu-uh I didnt" and rewrite your own fucking history. God damn you retards are dense

File: 1485067544902.jpg (231KB, 1200x663px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1200x663px

>>79063961
Trump lied literally his first day in office. About an objective, numerical fact, that could be checked by anyone in eight seconds. Why would someone tell such a stupid lie?

File: 1453943909694.jpg (79KB, 330x300px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 330x300px

>>79063987
>dailykos

>>79063946
She outright denied that she said what CNN said she said and asked them why they were lying. Are CNN journalists clairvoyant now?

>>79063961
How did they lie? I haven't heard about this.

I've been on a news media cold Turkey ever since the election, way too much butthurt and opinion. Plus listening to politicians (from either side) makes we want to set things on fire.

File: hiljail.png (365KB, 600x431px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 600x431px

>>79064014
Why can't you guys stop projecting?

>>79064009
I bet you think anything anti-Trump is propaganda. Sometimes you faggots just straight up talk like you are brainwashed by the State.

>>79064065
They lied.

Source: Breitbart

>>79064033
She made statements and tweets about Trump weeks before the CNN statement. Is this hard? She backtracked in a huff when they reported exactly what she fucking said

>>79064009
> You don't know whether they did

Neither do you, friend. They apologized for being biased, that's all there is to it.

>>79064065
They pretended that Trump threatened Mexico and had a spat with the president, and also that he was very disrespectful with Australian's presidency. Both governments came out and said it was a lie, and that the "internal sources" were bullshitting.

>>79062823
The story is true. It really happened.

There are minor changes for the purposes of the film. For example, it portrays all three women as being best friends and carpooling to work every day, simply so they can have conversations about events in the movie. They knew each other but probably didn't interact as much as implied.

Furthermore, the events of the movie are condensed into a few months, with the individual women obtaining their goals all at about the same time. In reality they were in separate departments and the three different accomplishments took place over the course of a few years.

That's just story telling stuff. It's fine. All the essential events of the story, including the dramatic phone call with John Glenn, really happened.

Stop listening to Breitbart, you racist retard.

>>79064087
No, just CNN and Breitbart. I'm the guy who dared to make recommendations. A bad choice on /tv/, I know.

>>79064091
Probably not a good idea to base your opinion on a news network on what you hear from its competitors. Though I guess I mostly base my opinion on Breitbart on the argumentative level of the people that cite it, so I'm not much better.

>>79064157
This post can end the /pol/ thread now

Someone call it in.

>>79064157
WRONG

>>79064026
>whataboutery
And? Did I say I'm a Trump supporter? I'm just contradicting the claim that any of those news outlets is reliable or unbiased in its factual reporting. Stop being irrational.

>>79064087
>dont question the President
>disregard any news that is anti-trump
>support divisive rhetoric
>justify anything Trump does no matter how much it fucks with the middle class who voted for him
>sperg out when people make fun of him
It legit sounds like brainwashing at times, it astounds me how anyone can act like this and then pretend they love freedom of speech or liberty in general

It is like they wouldn't be bothered to be called subjects as long as their dictators were conservative

>>79064145
Source.....

>>79064145
https://www.wsj.com/articles/mexican-leader-enrique-pena-nieto-under-fire-over-trump-phone-call-1486053700

Here is WSJ's coverage of the alleged phone call. Therein you find the following:

> The Mexican government said the AP’s accounts of the remarks “do not correspond to reality.”

> “The tone was constructive and an agreement was reached so work teams could meet often to build a positive accord for both Mexico and the U.S.,” Mexico’s foreign ministry said Wednesday night.

So what exactly did they misreport?

>>79064135
No, I don't. But unlike you, I don't construct some entirely speculative narrative that fits ideological whims in order to justify my irrational hatred.

And it still doesn't change the fact that by apologizing, NYT showed considerably more integrity than Breitbart ever will.

>>79064210
t. a literal nazi

>>79064157
The racist characters are completely made up. Is that just a "small change" for you?

Few are denying what these women did, the point is that the importance of their work is exagerated. What irks me personally is that there were hundreds of white males doing the same or even harder jobs for the NASA who were more important, but since they are the "wrong skin" they don't get to have a movie. Plus the entire narrative of minorities being snubbed, when NASA has always acknowledged what the women in the movie did.

You don't need to read Breitbart to realize there is an important part of bullshittery here.

>>79064358
>the importance of their work is exagerated.
It literally isnt you fucking tard, you just want this to be true since you clearly have an agenda here with this film and trying to discredit it.

>>79064358
>The racist characters are completely made up.

Movie would have been 10x better if they'd shamed the real racists, amirite?

>>79064358
>so much delusion: the post

>>79064392
It literally is, you fucking tard, you just want this to be not true since you clearly have an agenda here with this film and trying to prop it up.

>>79064392
>It literally isnt
It literally is.

Also nice of you to ignore the other points in the post. They made up characters.

>>79064433
There was no real racists. That was the problem. They had to invent some to race b8.
Class Hollywood.

>>79064446
>triggered by facts
clockwork

>>79064433
>movie whose central theme is institutionalized racism and the hurdles minorities have to go through to succeed
>they literally have to create obstacles that did not exist
Not hard.

>>79064447
>facts you can just look up in less than a minute to see how important she was
Wouldn't be having this convo if she was white and you know it

>>79064464
>>79064488
>There was no real racists.

Racism didn't exist before Obama divided the country, amirite?

File: apollo13.jpg (58KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 400x600px

>>79064358
>What irks me personally is that there were hundreds of white males doing the same or even harder jobs for the NASA who were more important, but since they are the "wrong skin" they don't get to have a movie.
Jesus Christ.

White males don't need a fucking movie about everything they do. They just do it. There's not enough time in the universe to document the achievements of white people.

Also there's pic related.

>>79064210
Aside from the Guardian and possibly NYT, the listed news sources are considered centrist and reliable by people across the political spectrum. They also consistently win, or a nominated for, Pulitzers, indicating that they are respected among their peers.

Can you say the same about Breitbart?

http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/

Take a look at this, even hardcore conservatives trust the Wall Street Journal, and the Economist is trusted by people who are somewhat conservative. That should tell you something.

>>79064490
Yea, because no one would have made this movie since there would be no way to race b8 and inflate the egos of liberals.

File: images (2).jpg (6KB, 188x232px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 188x232px

>>79064358
>What irks me personally is that there were hundreds of white males doing the same or even harder jobs for the NASA who were more important, but since they are the "wrong skin" they don't get to have a movie.

>>79064494
The women literally wrote in her memoirs that she experienced no racism at NASA, so they invented some.
kek, liberals sure gotta suck when the demand outstrips the supply

>>79064515
>movies are in production for years at a time
>"LOL TOTALLY TIMED THIS FOR A TRUMP PRESIDENCY"

>>79064494
I'll go slowly so your small brain can understand
>poster says that almost nothing in the movie is false, only a few temporal details
>point out that several characters and conflicts that the MC goes through are made up
>hurr durr but racism existed?!?!

The part about the bathrooms is true. The part about the racist scientist snubbing black women at every move is false.

File: 16105526_1184614831606784_6821125015226626083_n.jpg (39KB, 539x960px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 539x960px

>>79064516
Racist sexist transphobic nazis btfo

>>79064510
>Can you say the same about Breitbart?

Breitbart won /r/kotakuinaction's website of the year two years in a row.

File: disgusted_pepe.jpg (105KB, 1024x904px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1024x904px

>white male Democrat voters

Literally why?
They fucking hate you

File: waffle.gif (958KB, 222x150px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 222x150px

>>79064510
>They also consistently win, or a nominated for, Pulitzers, indicating that they are respected among their peers.

>an industry award is supposed to mean something
This from the board that regularly trashes the Academy for being a popularity content.

>>79064540
>get btfo
>le ebin straw man delfection
Being a liberal is tough, because you know you are wrong bout everything, and can't do shit about it. Dat dissonance must be hell.

File: 1469163397787.png (451KB, 1000x721px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 1000x721px

So what kind of movie does Breitbart like? Deadpool? Suicide Squad? Some other manbaby capeshit?

File: 1484237516326.png (581KB, 787x787px) Image search: [Google]

581KB, 787x787px

>>79063277
they also like to lie

>>79064510
Breitbart is shit and I almost never read it unless I have other sources to back their statements up. What I'm saying is that the "unbiased and trusted" outlets still have a long way to go to be reliable for me.

The economist for example actively pushes for globalism and don't even tries to hide it. I read some good articles about social issues there but in economic issues they are very biased.

>>79064581
fair enough, I take it back.
>>79064595
It's better than literally nothing, which is what Breitbart has going for it.

While I may not always agree with the academy, I would rather watch an oscar winning film I had never heard about, than a movie that had been nominated for nothing, and which I still hadn't heard about.

>>79064507
I'm not saying a movie was necessary about white achievements. I'm just calling out the racial narrative in Hidden Figures.

>>79064629
that's where you're wrong kiddo; I love jerkin it to totally true progressive movies featuring POC besting dumb whitey - checkmate pal.

>>79064654
Breitbart was literally bought by a presidential candidate. Anyone who reads it is a moron.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/trump-bannon-charities-looking-even-dodgier-ever

>>79064654
I don't disagree. Which is why I have at least four or five different papers in my newsfeed, in some vain hope that they might counteract each others' bias.

Too bad I haven't been able to find an even remotely serious paper to the right of WSJ. You got any recommendations?

File: original.jpg (16KB, 720x368px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 720x368px

A good personality consists of a chick with a little hard body, who will satisfy all sexual demands without being too slutty about things, and who essentially will keep her dumb fucking mouth shut.

>>79064262
Ok you are right, I'll give it to you that some of them have modified the statements. But the initial narrative of "diplomatic chaos in Trump's presidency" is still strong and partially caused by those media outlets, which is the point. The entire controversy was a non-issue, but since no one waited for official sources the harm is already done.

>>79064709
I doubt many people (apart from r/thedonald fags read breitbart - it does have a narrative. It is better to use RT and then news link sites that direct you to a wealth of different sites - you can't just look at one news source; that's retarded.

>>79064596
Do you really believe that, in this big world, only conservatives are correct? What a meme life...

>>79064649
>only liberals lie
>I type as I sit in my FEMA death camp

>Brietbart

>>79064822
No, but I struggle to find something modern left is right about. All these weird lies/delusions like rape culture, wage gap, biological homosexuality, race IQ and crime rates, hypocrisy towards Islam, etc.

What are liberals right about?

>>79064809
It's pretty much impossible to find a news site that doesn't show their political leanings in articles. Journalism for the most part is dead. Even ones that used to be decent like the New York Times are biased and even have clickbait shit now.

>>79064865
Let me guess, liberals are wrong about climate change science too?

>>79064865
Don't confuse the extreme left with the left. They're as different as Alt-right and the right.

>>79062917
there's no such thing you fucking retard, that's how bias works, it'd your job as a human with a fucking brain to figure out who has what bias and form your own opinions

>>79064865
>I believe in that meme that your sexuality is a choice
>conservatives are never wrong
Sure bud.

>>79064769
But there is diplomatic chaos in the Trump presidency. That is an objective fact; most of the world outside America has no fucking clue what to make of the statements the man has been making, and now have no idea what to expect.

He stirred crises with China over Taiwan and Russia over nuclear weapons within one week of taking over, and he has previously questioned the NATO-alliance. Many of these things may be politically reasonable, but they undoubtedly cause chaos.

>>79064536
Why racism was added to the movie that didn't exist in real life? When Bazinga gave her the mean stink eye? Or the scene where they lynched her dog?

>>79064886
I don't know, nor care about it. Seems that if it's true we are fucked anyway, oh well.

>>79064905
There is no biological basis for homosexuality. Stop being so anti-science.

>>79064729
No. I don't spend as much time as I should reading articles, but usually I just try to gather as many sources as possible and see which ones contradict each other.

And it's not really a news source but Quillette is usually pretty decent about new events. It's more of a rationalist site than right-wing though, but their essays usually have enough data to give you a good view of an issue. It's the only site that comes to mind when I think of consistency.

>>79064865
Meanwhile, in Trumptardia: "The Earth is 10,000 years old!"

File: persuasion prophet does it again.png (473KB, 710x767px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 710x767px

>>79064914
>chaos

>>79064929
>There is no biological basis for homosexuality.
>conservatives are never wrong
WEW

>>79064958
>anti-science
>straw man
I can't even. I'm literally shaking.

>>79064977
You just said that "I cant think of one thing the modern left is right about" and you have been insinuating that the conservative Right is objectively more correct, but then you say a clearly delusional anti-science statement...

You can see how this is funny, right? The irony perhaps?

>>79064929
>There is no biological basis for homosexuality.
That is completely false. It might be true that people are not "born gay" or that there is no gay gene, but there are definetly genetic tendencies that make you more likely to be gay than other people. It's not something that is learnt by culture, and there have been homosexuals since recorded history exists.

>>79064865
I consider myself liberal, so let me give it a go:
> rape culture
No such thing
> Wage gap
I believe in this in the sense that traditionally feminine professions, like teachers and nurses, are underpaid, whereas traditionally male undertaking, like speculating in housing, playing the stock markets and working in sales or marketing, are grossly overpaid compared to what value they generate for society as a whole.
> biological homosexuality
The science is inconclusive on this one.
> Race IQ
Science is inconclusive
> Crime rates
Crime rates how?
> Hypocrisy towards Islam
I believe "innocent until proven guilty" is a more important foundational principle of our justice system than any other, and that that extends to people who identify as Muslims. I don't see how that is hypocrisy.

>>79064957
How else would you characterize the past few weeks? Did you forget about the travel ban already?

>>79063348
they apologized for not doing a better coverage that could have made them realize the scope of Trump's support better, as well as them believing the polls too blindly.

File: Nice.png (33KB, 341x403px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 341x403px

>>79065012
>you have been insinuating
Well at least you realized you are straw manning on your own. Good job kid.

>>79065016
Don't waste your time, anon.

>>79065016
>It might be true that people are not "born gay" or that there is no gay gene,
Correct, the rest is semantics. No one is born gay.
We' re done here.

File: Sean-Spicer-angry-600x400[1].jpg (36KB, 598x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 598x400px

>>79065031
>ban

STOP CALLING IT THAT

>>79065039
Are you not going to answer or what faggot? You have been literally saying that you cant think of one thing they got right...

>>79064957
I'm not American, so I'm judging the "international chaos" on how news media outside the US are reacting.. Hence, you know, international.

>>79065031
Glorious. Nothing bad happened.

>>79065066
Are you born straight?

>>79064955
>>79064905
>anon clearly states that he doesn't think conservatives are correct about everything, just that he doesn't see what the left is right about
>respond with deflection and "b-b-but muh christians!"
So is there anything the left is right about? I kind of agree with the left in environmentalist and animal protection issues but that's it.

>>79064892
Rape culture, wage gap, views on muslims purely as victims, thinking that the misgivings of blacks in america is entirely whitey's fault, etc. are all mainstream left values, and even some conservatives share it. What the fuck are you on about?

>>79065090
Oh, so you're delusional then.

>>79065066
but by that logic, people aren't born straight either. Both heterosexual and homosexual behavior is largely learned.

>>79065016
There is strong genetic evidence in homosexuality being a genetic trait.

>>79065103
how many mainstream leftists do you know, lol.

I live in a country far to the left of America and even here people don't believe that nonsense.

>>79065066
Is there a gene for altruism? No. Are there people who are born with a tendency to favour selflesness? Yes. It's not hard.

>>79065103
How do you "kinda" agree about environmentalism? You either accept statistical facts on carbon emissions or you don't.

>>79065028
>whereas traditionally male undertaking
That's a different issue.

>The science is inconclusive on this one.
There is no science on this matter. Just "social" science.

>Science is inconclusive
Well IQ is social science as well, but one that liberals conveniently ignore since it does not fit the narrative.

>Crime rates how?
Race is the best predictor of crime.

>I believe "innocent until proven guilty" is a more important foundational principle of our justice system than any other
Sure, but I think we can both see the hypocrisy of the left in dealing with Christians and Muslims. Virtually every criticism towards Christianity applies doubly so to Muslims.

>>79065103
>views on muslims purely as victims

Where does this idea come from? I've never seen a liberal defend ISIS.

File: 23626.jpg (187KB, 494x791px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 494x791px

what did they mean by this?

>>79065097
>>79065110
Yes it's more of a nurture thing than anything else.

>>79065158
Liberals will tell you that ISIS has nothing do with Islam in a heartbeat.

>>79065153
>Race is the best predictor of crime.
No it isnt, even the FBI had to correct you all on that. There is no correlation between your skin color and criminality. It is a strawman. Criminality is not related directly to race and not a single FBI crime statistic is saying that, they never have.

I will repeat: crime statistics have never once said a person's RACE is a correlational factor IN crime.

>>79065153
>Virtually every criticism towards Christianity applies doubly so to Muslims.

You mean how a Christian majority in the United States is attempting to insert religious law in public policy? Yeah those durn American Muslims are just as guilty of that.

>>79065183
>you are born straight
>but you choose to be gay
I cant fathom how people live so long without correcting themselves on basic biology

>>79065211
No, they'll tell you ISIS doesn't represent Islam, because it doesn't.

>>79065153
> That's a different issue
How so? If an obvious discrepancy between actual value to society and share of the wealth also has disproportionate consequences in terms of gender, that's a double sided problem, but also an opportunity to solve two problems at once.
> There is no science on this matter.
There is plenty of science, it's just largely inconclusive. But you can go to your local zoo and look at the gay penguins if you want to know about natural homosexuality
> IQ is social science
So not an exact science, gotya
> Race is the best predictor of crime
Source?
> Hypocrisy
What hypocrisy? I prefer religion out of my public space in general, Muslim or Christian.

>>79065215
This is semantics, no crime correlation is "statically" valid, but race correlates far better than liberals' favorite excuses like employment or poverty.

>>79065273
It doesnt though, you just want to believe that. You are straight up delusional if you think poverty doesnt play one of the more vital roles in crime

>>79065071
Then why did you, Kellyanne, the president and Rudy all call it a ban, Sean?

>>79064886
They're certainly wrong about the solution.

>>79065228
Nigga are you serious? Are you not aware of what the Middle East is like? Or what they are trying to do in various places in Europe?

They don't have the numbers pull any of that shit in USA, but they would turns USA into a Sharia compliment theocracy if they could, like they do everywhere else.

Separation of Church and Sate is a Western value.

The fucking delusion, kek

>>79065273
>Saying crime is related to employment or poverty is an "excuse".
Are you new to planet earth or something?

>>79065028
Nice try but
>what value they generate for society as a whole.
That is not how wages are decided. Social and care-giving jobs inherently pay less than the others, and no patriarchy can be blamed for that. Besides most of the gap that related to work choice has to do with either being dangerous, having poor conditions or needing technical skills like engineering, which definetly deserve to be paid more.

>Science is inconclusive
Yeah and liberals deny it, and pretend it is settled in favour of what they believe. It's ridiculous what scientists studying race differences have to go through just to find the truth. Left is wrong in this issue.

>Hypocrisy towards Islam
I assume anon was refering to extremely conservative and backwards beliefs in the muslim community being overlooked in favour of a victimization narrative. Look no further than the Woman's march, and read on the muslim woman who was the figurehead. She said stuff like women not being able to drive in SA is irrelevant, but what was pushed as a symbol of women's liberation.

Also no one is denying the fact that not all muslims are terrorists or bad people, but their religion definetly promotes that behaviour (this is a factual statement).

>>79065241
Nice strawman, but when you have no argument lying is the best option.

File: 15_co2_left_061316.gif (21KB, 700x453px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 700x453px

>>79065313
They literally aren't. But I can see you dont like science to begin with

>>79065303
>>79065303
kek

Race correlates with crime far better than poverty.
Stay delusional if you want to, but this will never change.

>>79065145
I agree with climate change and that emissions need to be tuned down. I disagree with their negative view on Nuclear energy, and think that it's impossible to abandon other, more contaminant sources of energy without it. Same goes for genetically modified crops: they are fine.

>>79065334
Lying about how genetics and human biology work? You ever wonder that maybe the shit you believe is just...outdated? You have any self-awareness here?

>>79063873
Facts are facts whether or not you chose to believe them, thats the great thing about them.

Sorry kid, better luck next time.

>>79065364
Then source something saying exactly that you dumb faggot. Where is it?

>>79065328
> That is not how wages are decided
But many low-paying but utterly vital feminine professions are public sector jobs. See teachers, caregivers and nurses. Choosing not to tax high earners in the private sector to pay these people higher wages is a matter of policy, i.e. choice.
> yeah and liberals deny that it is inconclusive
You are arguing with a liberal, member?
> Left is wrong in this issue
> Yeah science is inconclusive
So which is it? Is the science inconclusive or is the left wrong?
> Look at this one woman ahead of the Women's March

I don't argue anecdotal evidence on principle, you have to do better.

>>79065405
Not if not a single group, historical society or study disagrees with you and you refuse to provide evidence to back your claim

>>79065158
Look at ANY kind of data from muslims in Europe and you will see they fare worse than the rest in basically everything: unemployement, high crime rates, backwards values, etc. Yet they are given a free pass because of "Islamophobia", a made up term used to dismiss concerns about the (very rational) dislike of Islam.

Leftists tend to mix up defending individual muslim people from defending Islam's view as an ideology.

>>79065443
>Leftists tend to mix up defending individual muslim people from defending Islam's view as an ideology.
Probably because conservatives conflate these constantly

>>79065249
>How so?
Because wage gap and earnings gap are different issues.

>There is plenty of science
Yes, but only of the social kind, there is no hard science.

>So not an exact science, gotya
Obviously, but liberals will ignore it because they don't like it.

>Source?
https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Crime-Correlates-Lee-Ellis/dp/0123736129

>What hypocrisy?
Christians are imperialistic homophobic patriarchal sexists. Muslims are victims.

>>79065443
it would be helpful if you would be kind enough to provide that data yourself.

>>79065303
He is absolutely correct and you are a lying, insecure faggot. Blacks are more prone to whites, even correcting for poverty or education, than any other race in America. I'd argue that it is not biological but cultural, but it is true.

>>79065353
>But I can see you dont like science to begin with
Where can you see that in my 6 word post?

The solution to the climate problem isn't slapping a tax onto something or whine about it in school but to reduce the global population to an appopriate level and then have the rest live in a sustainable and economically friendly fashion, which would require decentralization and permaculture - something I'd wager that city dwelling liberals wouldn't really be up for.

>>79062823
How blacks should respond to this film:
>"Wow, what an inspiring story! This really makes me want to get a good education and contribute to humanity!"

How blacks actually respond:
>"SEE DEM WITE BOIZ ALWAYS BE UPPRESSIN US WE NEED REPERATIONS FU DAT MOON LANDIN" *drops out of school in 6th grade to sell drugs* *has 20 illegitimate children* *dies at 18 in a shootout with rival gang*

>>79065407
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3488363?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

>>79065439
False.

My post is 100% factually correct.

Sorry kid, better luck next time.

>>79065487
Then back this up with data conclusively saying a person's race correlates to crime. If this was true, you do realize that the same principles apply to every race, right? So then whites are more prone to hate crimes and suicide. Because they are white.
>inb4 b-but crime different for whitey

>>79065476
> Wage gap and earnings gap are different issues
Not if they can be solved the same way
> There is no hard science
There is no definitive consensus in hard science, that's different
> but liberals will ignore it
I'm a liberal...
> https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Crime-Correlates-Lee-Ellis/dp/0123736129
Im not paying 50 dollars based on a 4chan recommendation, try again.
> Christians are X, mulims are victims
Nice strawman, but that is in no way the dominant discourse on the left.

>>79065506
This doesnt say what you want it to say for your argument...

>>79065547
You're jumping to conclusions and jumping over cultural factors due to your butthurt.

But yeah, highers IQ's do correlate with suicide. Poor Japan.

>>79065492
Why is slapping a tax on something not a solution?

You conservatives love to reduce taxes to incentivize labor, why wouldn't in work the other way around?

>>79065588
So the Japanese are more suicidal because of their """race"""? You are breaking new scientific ground here! Suicide is a genetic trait!

>>79065583
You obviously didn't read it. Your ignorance is not my problem.

>>79065588
Yeah, a cultural factor isn't a biological race. Glad we cleared that autism up.

>>79065608
>When you get BTFO, just make shit up
I don't know why you guys are so bossed with reductio ad absurdum every time you realize the world is not black and white.

>>79065610
>The macro-level approach reemerged as a salient criminological paradigm in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Prompted by new theories and reformulations of existing ones, over 200 empirical studies explored ecological correlates of crime. Few efforts have been made, however, to "make sense" of this literature. A "meta-analysis" was undertaken to determine the relative effects of macro-level predictors of crime. Indicators of "concentrated disadvantage" (e.g., racial heterogeneity, poverty, and family disruption) are among the strongest and most stable predictors. Except for incarceration, variables indicating increased use of the criminal justice system (e.g., policing and get-tough policy effects) are among the weakest. Across all studies, social disorganization and resource/economic deprivation theories receive strong empirical support; anomie/strain, social support/social altruism, and routine activity theories receive moderate support; and deterrence/rational choice and subcultural theories receive weak support.

Literally says poverty is a major factor in crime you dense turbofaggot. Get out.

>>79065577
>Not if they can be solved the same way
Semantics.

>There is no definitive consensus in hard science
That's not an argument. There is no evidence for it.

>I'm a liberal...
And how do you feel about the IQ distribution among different "races?" What do you think the implications are?

>Im not paying 50 dollars based on a 4chan recommendation, try again.
Google it later then, it's not some huge secret, it's just one of the things liberals don't want to talk about.

>Nice strawman, but that is in no way the dominant discourse on the left.
kek
I didn't say it's the dominant discourse, but that there is an obvious hypocritical double standard.

>>79065645
>all the words I dont know what mean
If race is a factor in crime, then Japanese suicide rates are genetic to you. What is absurd is your logic

>>79065419
Don't you see that you are putting your own subjective value of how work should be paid, and wanting the government to enforce this arbitrary view? The feminists' point is that it is caused by the patriarchy when it's clearly the opposite: naturally the jobs men do tend to pay more, and the only way to "correct" this (based on an arbitrary definition of equality) is by government interaction.

>So which is it? Is the science inconclusive or is the left wrong?
Dude I told you already. Science is inconclusive, but the IQ racial gap is a very real possibility that is automatically labeled as a nazi belief by anyone on the left, and even huge parts of the right.

>I don't argue anecdotal evidence on principle, you have to do better.
Only right-wing politicians address issues like muslims having backwards beliefs or not integrating because of their culture. You won't find anyone on the left that doesn't consider muslims to be their "allies", or who speaks actively against muslim values. If you want a larger example: the SCPL outed out as an enemy Maajid Nawaz, an ex-muslim, as an instigator of hate. In reality he just points out the damage islamists do, never with personal attacks or hateful rethoric.

>>79065721
No, that's your logic. I never stated that. Genetics and cultural can be common or separate factors in these issues. Especially when Japan has a fucking centuries long tradition of suicide, Asian-Americans have far lower suicide rates, but black crimes rates are stupidly high across the entire world.

It's not black and white and all or nothing.
You're just making a shitty strawman.

>>79065782
>but the IQ racial gap is a very real possibility
No, since race is not really a scientific term in the way you all use it. No are no biological racial subsets of humans. Genetic variations do not denote a "race", so you start from an unscientific premise and build autistic false correlations around it.

>>79065671
If you would actually read the thing, you would see that % of black population is one of the highest crime correlators across hundreds of studies.

>>79065806
You dont seem to realize how your entire argument is built on a strawman, do you?

>>79065716
> Semantics
You're the one who claimed liberals had completely incomprehensible points of view on gender wage gap. Now that I present a point of view, you won't even discuss it. What does that say about you?
> There is no evidence for it
There is plenty of common sense evidence of biological homosexuality. The most logical of which must be that the first gay man must have come about somehow, unless we were all originally gay.
> How do you feel about IQ distribution.
Honestly? I don't give a shit. People are free to do as they please in life, under the law. I expect that right for myself, and I happily extend it to others.
> One of those things liberals won't talk about
I'm a liberal..
> Obvious hypocritical double standard
Not obvious enough for me to notice it, apparently.

>>79065464
>b-but the right!!
We are not discussing right-wingers. But if it makes you feel better: people who attack individual muslims personally (instead of their ideology) are retarded.

>>79065483
There is not one single source for that. Just search for "turks in germany", "muslim criminality in UK", "muslim unemployement in Sweden", etc. you will find sources from both the left and the right. The first will argue it's because of racism and lack of funds, the second that it's because of muslim values. Pick which convinces you the most.

>>79065314
>they would turns USA into a Sharia compliment theocracy if they could

And we'll cross that bridge when/if we get to it, but it's not hypocritical for American liberals to focus on Christianity over Islam given Christianity actually has power in American politics.

>>79065857
But this study never once said " they commit crimes because they are black". You didnt read the fucking thing at all. No study that is credible makes a false correlation like that

>>79065603
>Why is slapping a tax on something not a solution?
Because it's a global problem, you're not going to solve it by taxing an individual country when there are others that could just ignore your environmental efforts for their own financial interests. All you're doing is punishing your own population twice, first by forcing them to pay more money for necessities, second by handicapping your economy. And for what? It's not like having to pay a bit more for something is going to change the environment, especially not when that money is used for something as pointless as paying people to whine about this topic in schools.

>you conservatives
Please stop pulling things out of your ass.

>>79065671
The same thing that causes black poverty also causes black crime. I don't know if it's biological or cultural, but it is there. Black areas correlote MORE (key word) with crime than poverty in general, which is just one of the factors.

>>79065862
>You're the one who claimed liberals had completely incomprehensible points of view on gender wage gap.Y
You're conflating the wage gap with earnings gap. I don't care. Different issues.

>There is plenty of common sense evidence of biological homosexuality.
Come on, let's no get into common sense.

>Honestly? I don't give a shit. People are free to do as they please in life, under the law. I expect that right for myself, and I happily extend it to others.
That's fair. But liberals sure like to blame black crime on poverty, whereas the correlation between poverty and crime is only slightly higher than IQ and crime. It's worth exploring.

>I'm a liberal..
Then feel free to read up on the issue, at the very least it will force you consider why it happens.

>Not obvious enough for me to notice it, apparently.
Apparently. It's not like people are covering up all the fucked up shit Muslims do and making excuses for it non-stop or anything.

>>79065857
>A "meta-analysis" was undertaken to determine the relative effects of macro-level predictors of crime. Indicators of "concentrated disadvantage" (e.g., racial heterogeneity, poverty, and family disruption) are among the strongest and most stable predictors
You just google searched and picked the first one you skimmed without even reading, right?

>>79065443
>Look at ANY kind of data from muslims in Europe and you will see they fare worse than the rest in basically everything: unemployement, high crime rates, backwards values, etc.

And? Are you saying crime and unemployment are Muslim ideologies?

>>79065782
> subjective value of how work should be paid and wanting the government to enforce it.
But that is always the case. There is no objectively better way of paying people, only arguments for and against.
> Dude I told you
Maybe people label you a nazi because you make radical and far reaching policy proposals based on inconclusive science that is wildly inflammatory?
> you won't find anyone on the left who speaks actively against muslim values
The five core pillars of Islam are: 1. Faith. 2. Prayer. 3. Charity. 4. Fasting. 5. Pilgrimage. None of those are inherently controversial. What you want people to speak out against is radical Islamism, which plenty of people on the left speak out against.

>>79065961
You arent understanding the conversation, it's like you have this mental block in the way.

>>79065911
It's a fucking meta analysis, that concluded that the percentage of black population correlates at something like 70% with crime, far better than dam near everything else used as an excuse for crime, including poverty and education. I don't care if you are butthurt about it.

>>79065961
Then white suicides and hate crimes are more prevalent BECAUSE they are white. You either go both ways or you are a racist hypocrite you dumb faggot

>>79065979
Read the conclusion, or fuck off.

>>79065839
Holy shit this high-school tier of rethoric. Substitute "race" by "ethnic origin" and it's the same argument. You think you are making a strong argument but in reality you are just asking semantics like a moron.

Race doesn't exist in the sense that there are huge chunks of humans that have a perfectly separable set of characteristics, but there is obviously an spectrum so that when you compare the ends of it differences are going to appear. You can track people's origins from their DNA with huge certainity. If there is literally nothing correct about the definition of race, how come data consistently shows blacks to have less IQ?

>>79065889
>We are not discussing right-wingers.

But we are. We're talking about liberals defending Muslims from attacks from asserting that Islam is a corrupting and unwelcome influence in Western society.

>>79066015
So again, you didn't read the study you linked? Gotcha. Because you are saying stupid shit that isnt in the abstract and you absolutely dont understand what it is trying to say and how POVERTY is a MAIN indicator OF HIGH black crime

>>79066041
>hate crimes
But black on white interracial crime is far higher than white on black crime.

And Muslims are the best when it comes to hate crimes, especially against jews

And your straw man is still shit.

>>79065969
> you're conflating
Who's nitpicking semantics now?
> Let's not get into common sense
I'm trying to be nice to you, but you are really leaving the goal wide open here, buddy...
> feel free to read up on it
I have. It said the science was inconclusive, so I moved on with my life.

>>79066049
Did you?

>>79066085
Yea, it's in the actual study. Black population is the best predictor for crime rate, stay mad.

> what it is trying to say and how POVERTY
kek, here they go again, liberals, not take that b8

>>79065981
I'm saying muslim ideology makes them auto-segregate in small cultures that are much more dysfunctional than the rest, which makes crime rates, unemployement, etc. go up. It's a way of measuring how well a group is performing in a country, and muslims mostly lose.

>>79066100
>Who's nitpicking semantics now?
You still are, I don't know how many time I have to tell you I don't care about the earnings gaps.

>I'm trying to be nice to you
You'd be nicer if you just admitted that there is no proof that human homosexuality is based on biology.

>I have. It said the science was inconclusive
It's real if it fits my narrative, it's inconclusive if it doesn't, kek.

Use some common sense. Pick up a history book and read about Sub-Saharan Africans, their achievements and their culture. "Common sense" should be enough to fill in the gaps.

>>79066041
If you can find consistent proof that when all variables are controlled, whites are more likely than others to commit certain crimes or have certain behaviour then yeah, I'll agree with you. The ironic thing is that with race crimes you might not find the result you are implying here. White cultures are some of the least racist in the entire Earth right now.

>>79063034
>smart
>black women
I kekd

>>79066079
You csn calculate the passing of genes from large ethnic "areas" of homogenous gene variants. This does not denote a race or that races exist. Not a single """race""" is defined by a single continent alone, especially with genes. It's a dumb /pol/ argument
>how come data consistently shows blacks to have less IQ?
You keep acting like this matters or is some "GOTCHA" to support how you think blacks are dumb niggers. What even is black? All of them? You dont even know how to catalogue what makes a enthic group "le black" nobody does, because it is 300 year old bullshit psuedo-science. So fucking what if certain African(?) homogeneous groups have lower IQ levels? Probably has a lot to do with access to basic fucking facilities like schools more than some genetic predisposition...which if you were to argue that, would be a whole other spectrum of autism that virtually all of biology disagrees with

>>79066088
>But black on white interracial crime is far higher than white on black crime.
Nope

>>79066128
>Black population is the best predictor for crime rate, stay mad.
And again, it isnt BECAUSE their skin is black. Why is this so fucking hard for you? How does this not sound like bullshit to you on your head? You really think skin color is magic like that?

>>79066179
> You still are
I can't believe I'm down to this level, but.. No you. There is no workable definitive difference between wage gap and earnings gap, at least not one I have seen people use or can find right now. So you will have to explain yourself.
> no proof
I did that right away when I said that the science is inconclusive. But let's take the common sense route. If homosexuality is entirely learned behavior, then at some point in history, entirely straight human beings must have chosen to be gay. And why would they do that, if they were entirely straight?
> Use common sense about Africans
But my sub-Saharan hard-working neighbor who earns more than me and works also affects my common sense. Maybe I should just stick with my original notion, and let people be people.

>>79066183
You are asking for a false equivalence though...

>>79065986
Who said I want policy made on terms of race? What fucking jump is that?

The point is that several policies that come from the left (for example when it comes to blacks) are based on the idea that it's a problem of the institutions and the system, and doesn't come from the communities themselves. My "radical nazi idea" is that they will fail because they are addressing the wrong issues. Obama wasted millions of dollars in improving poor black schools, and guess what? It failed catastrophically.

>being a muslim apologist
Holy fucking shit. Just read this on muslim's views around the world:
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
Literally hundreds of millions are in favour of death for apostasy, sharia law, etc. And if you want the european ones, just look up the poll in UK that showed 50% of all muslims wanted homosexuality to be made illegal (homosexuality as a sexual choice, not marriage). Not even christians, who I'm sure you dislike for leaning mostly conservative, are this bad.

The left is wrong in pretending Islam is as good or as bad as any other religion, and that the West shouldn't be wary about it. This is not just terrorism, which is another issue (although it also leaves muslims in a terrible position, being the majority of perpetrators of religiously-motivated terrorist attacks or religious wars).

File: albino2-jpg.jpg (51KB, 488x700px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 488x700px

>>79066299
das rite, is jus da skin collah

>>79066080
And when defending those individuals muslims, they pretend Islam is a peaceful religion and downplay its negative side. Follow the argument you dummy.

>>79066340
Short of forcibly converting Muslims or exterminating them, what in the fuck do you want anyone to even do?

>>79066340
Like I said, Radical Islamism, the desire to force Islam into the political and public sphere, is something I am highly critical of, as are most of the other leftists I know.

But the foundational core of Islam is much simpler than that, and not in and of itself controversial.

>>79066229
Did you even read what I wrote? Yes, the classical concept of race is wrong, you can't draw perfect lines that separate all humans into races. But you can still classify people by their origin and find genetic differences.

>You keep acting like this matters
Well the entire argument is wether or not the IQ gap is a valid issue, so obviously my main point is that yeah, it could exist and be biological. If you want real world applications: look no further than leftists claiming that black underrepresentation in jobs that require high intellect is caused by racism or lack of opportunity. If it turns out it's genetic, then this is something that can't be corrected.

>Probably has a lot to do with access to basic fucking facilities like schools more than some genetic predisposition...
Dude the ENTIRE POINT is that if you correct for these parameters there is still a gap. This is far from settled science, and people are still arguing wether or not is true (the genetic side is winning in my view, but I'm biased). This is from days ago:
http://quillette.com/2017/01/17/saints-sinners-a-dialogue-on-the-hardest-topic-in-science/

>>79066522
>genetics are winning
And genetics say there are no biological races

I honestly believe you harbor a prejudice for some sort of other race and really want this to be true.

>>79066462
Stricter immigration policies, stop giving political power to muslim institutions (I've seen leftists argue for muslim classes), attempt to stop segregation of muslims in western countries with their own schools, don't cave in to muslim extremists (http://quillette.com/2016/05/05/free-speech-and-islam-the-left-betrays-the-most-vulnerable ), etc.

>>79066510
>the foundational core of Islam is much simpler than that
The theoretical side of ANY ideology or religion is usually simple and sound. Christianity is just about loving others and giving your other cheek, right?

But we are talking about policies and the real world, and any indicator you can think of puts Islam compared to other religions in a worse position. That is my argument, and I don't believe left-wing parties agrees with me.

>>79066684
> I don't believe left-wing parties agree with me.
I never met a left-winger who wants Islam to play a role in governance, they are perhaps just less worried about it.

>>79066582
Are you actively being obtuse or what.

Biologists argue that you can't cleanly separate people into the traditionally-defined races based on genes. But nobody is against the idea that genes might appear more often in populations that share a certain ancestry, like people from southern Africa.

And again, definitions aside, studies like the Minnesota twins experiment show very strong hints towards a genetic difference in IQ between people with different skins. Don't call it race, call it something else, but it is there.

Also read the damn link, there are scientists working on this right now who disagree with you.

>>79066721
Read my other response, I've seen left-wingers argue for Islam having a stronger importance in education because of "tolerance". Of course this involves giving a very nice view of Islam that ignores all its shortgivings.

Besides role in governance is not the only issue. The creation of dysfunctional societies based on a denial of muslim non-integration is a bigger threat.

>>79066861
> I've seen left-wingers
What did I say about anecdotes?
> The creation of dysfunctional societies
Criticizing this on the left is mainstream in my country. Maybe America is just behind the curve?

>>79063234
>New York Times
>Washington Post
>The Guardian

If you think any of those three publications are anything other than narrative pushing garbage then you need to sudoku my man