pimpnamedraypeat
Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,045
First of all that was not the only argument I made, just the only argument you cherry picked, nor was it stupid. Claiming that welfare has led to dysgenic breeding in inner cities however just may be and is a perfect example of eugenic pseudoscience.
"Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be scientific and factual in the absence of evidence gathered and constrained by appropriate scientific methods. Pseudoscience is often characterized by the following: contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; and absence of systematic practices when developing theories." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
The wild claims of Eugenicists seem to fit quite well with the above description of pseudoscience. The various factors that play into the area of Human development are far more complicated then breeding where one or two traits are optimized such as a horse's speed or a cow's milk production. Eugenics is a pseudoscience because of the many conclusions made solely on the basis of genetics without a full understanding of the far greater impact of epigenetics, nutrition, environment and many other factors we don't have a clue about.
you may have a point there. It is hard to quantify and measure good genes and separate them from environmental effects.
I would say several generations of breeding with violent, criminal, hypersexual men would lead to a larger selection of criminal, violent, hypersexual people as can be seen in the black community.
It would be difficult to seperate the effects of these harmful breeding practices from the effect of the poor, violent, single-mother environment inner city blacks grow up in but I wager that it is the combination of both that has had such a deleterious effect on black people.