Richard Spencer and Modern Nazism: #NotMyAmerica

[Torrocca]

That's your job. You defend YOUR point with YOUR evidence.

Source for this?

Burden of Proof.

[Arumbia67]

I see him as no different than Quanell X. And he was allowed to tell a several thousand strong crowd to commit violence based on skin color, and personal income. Let him speak, but keep the guard on stand by. If things turn violent, send them in.

[Tahinar Tribes]

High school Speech and Debate classes

Source for this?

Common law of speech and debate. If you stopped to defend the other person's point, then what would be the point of debating in the first place?

It's so common sense, I can't find a single source for defending the other person and not your own.

[Trumptonium]

Source for this?

Common law of speech and debate. If you stopped to defend the other person's point, then what would be the point of debating in the first place?

It's so common sense, I can't find a single source for defending the other person and not your own.

Common sense is not a source, try again.

Black kids performing worse at school regardless of socioeconomic factors is also common sense.

Now answer this

High school Speech and Debate classes

Hang on - did you just say your high school taught you in debate classes that you have to hold up and read out pages of whatever you are referencing, instead of allowing your audience to note-take and search for it later?

Is this some kind of Democrat-run county?

[Torrocca]

Common law of speech and debate. If you stopped to defend the other person's point, then what would be the point of debating in the first place?

It's so common sense, I can't find a single source for defending the other person and not your own.

Common sense is not a source, try again.

Black kids performing worse at school regardless of socioeconomic factors is also common sense.

Now answer this

Hang on - did you just say your high school taught you in debate classes that you have to hold up and read out pages of whatever you are referencing, instead of allowing your audience to note-take and search for it later?

Is this some kind of Democrat-run county?

Again, burden of proof.

Maybe next time don't declare me unfit for university-level schooling when you won't even acknowledge simple debate philosophy?

[Trumptonium]

Common sense is not a source, try again.

Black kids performing worse at school regardless of socioeconomic factors is also common sense.

Now answer this

Again, burden of proof.

Maybe next time don't declare me unfit for university-level schooling when you won't even acknowledge simple debate philosophy?

It's your claim. Source it and back it properly.

I am not required to make up for your laziness. This forum is not my personal attempt at writing a thesis or my doctorate with some requirement of referencing.

I do not lie, but I do not go out of my way to search for studies / books / newspapers / articles that confirm what I say when a simple google search can do just that. Would you go up to someone in real life demanding that? No.

[Torrocca]

Again, burden of proof.

Maybe next time don't declare me unfit for university-level schooling when you won't even acknowledge simple debate philosophy?

I am not required to make up for your laziness. This forum is not my personal attempt at writing a thesis or my doctorate with some requirement of referencing.

I do not lie, but I do not go out of my way to search for studies / books / newspapers / articles that confirm what I say when a simple google search can do just that. Would you go up to someone in real life demanding that? No.

So you're just showing you refuse to acknowledge basic debating philosophy and would rather debate on bad faith. Good to know.

[Tahinar Tribes]

High school Speech and Debate classes

Source for this?

Hang on - did you just say your high school taught you in debate classes that you have to hold up and read out pages of whatever you are referencing, instead of allowing your audience to note-take and search for it later?

Is this some kind of Democrat-run county?

Would have seen this if you edited sooner.

And the answer is: no, actually. Speech and debate actually taught me that burden of proof is the backbone of speech and debate. I can't just say "ALL JEWS ARE GREEDY AND WANT TO TAKE OVER BANKS AND MAKE US POOR" nor can I say "WHITES HAVE NO CULTURE" without backing up either point. What you think is sourcing is not actually typing and reading out multiple pages. It's just showing that you know what you're talking about and people don't think you're insane.

And no - I am not a Democrat, nor is it just Democrats that defend their points.

Common law of speech and debate. If you stopped to defend the other person's point, then what would be the point of debating in the first place?

It's so common sense, I can't find a single source for defending the other person and not your own.

Common sense is not a source, try again.

Black kids performing worse at school regardless of socioeconomic factors is also common sense.

Now answer this

Hang on - did you just say your high school taught you in debate classes that you have to hold up and read out pages of whatever you are referencing, instead of allowing your audience to note-take and search for it later?

Is this some kind of Democrat-run county?

Now I will find a source disproving that blacks perform worse at school.

[Trumptonium]

So you're just showing you refuse to acknowledge basic debating philosophy and would rather debate on bad faith. Good to know.

You're pulling a strawman.

Sorry.

I meant, you're[1] pulling a strawman [2]

[1]
Article title: Richard Spencer to speak at University of Florida
URL: viewtopic.php?p=32709520#p32709520
Authors: Torocca
Publication date: 19 October 2017

[2]
Article title: Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
Website title: Yourlogicalfallacyis.com
URL: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Authors: Jesse Richardson, Andy Smith, Som Meaden
Publisher: Flip Creative
Publication date: 2016

[Torrocca]

So you're just showing you refuse to acknowledge basic debating philosophy and would rather debate on bad faith. Good to know.

You're pulling a strawman.

Sorry.

I meant, you're pulling a strawman [1]

[1]
Article title: Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
Website title: Yourlogicalfallacyis.com
URL: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Authors: Jesse Richardson, Andy Smith, Som Meaden
Publisher: Flip Creative
Publication date: 2016

"I won't show my evidence to you."
"Burden of proof in debate says you have to."
"Well I won't."

This is arguing in bad faith.

Sure am misrepresenting your position, ain't I guv'nah?

[Tahinar Tribes]

So you're just showing you refuse to acknowledge basic debating philosophy and would rather debate on bad faith. Good to know.

You're pulling a strawman.

Sorry.

I meant, you're pulling a strawman [1]

[1]
Article title: Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
Website title: Yourlogicalfallacyis.com
URL: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Authors: Jesse Richardson, Andy Smith, Som Meaden
Publisher: Flip Creative
Publication date: 2016

That's not how sourcing works in debate.
Writing a paper, yes - but writing a paper is not debate.

[Vassenor]

Also "this is true because it makes sense" is a fallacy.

[Trumptonium]

I can't just say "ALL JEWS ARE GREEDY AND WANT TO TAKE OVER BANKS AND MAKE US POOR" nor can I say "WHITES HAVE NO CULTURE"

The difference between your incoherent ramble and my post was that I was clearly referencing a study, whereas you're making a broad claim.

A study (which I specifically tailored to make it easily searchable on google) is something for you to mull over, not me.

Had I said "ALL BLACK KIDS PERFORM WORSE AT SCHOOL REGARDLESS OF WEALTH", you'd have a point. But to my recollection, I did not.

[Alndar]

People dying by wildfire's and hurricanes deserve state of emergency status. Not a random shmuck speaking at an event. Huge overreaction, though every safety precaution to prevent violence should be taken.

[Torrocca]

I can't just say "ALL JEWS ARE GREEDY AND WANT TO TAKE OVER BANKS AND MAKE US POOR" nor can I say "WHITES HAVE NO CULTURE"

The difference between your incoherent ramble and my post was that I was clearly referencing a study, whereas you're making a broad claim.

A study (which I specifically tailored to make it easily searchable on google) is something for you to mull over, not me.

It's still lies on your to source that study properly and properly show it to us as per the burden of proof.

I'm finding it quite ironic that someone who insults my intelligence has to have basic debate philosophy explained to them.

[Tahinar Tribes]

Well - can't seem to find any article showing that this gap does not exist. Rather, I see plenty articles stating that it does. So I admit that's true.

So you're just showing you refuse to acknowledge basic debating philosophy and would rather debate on bad faith. Good to know.

You're pulling a strawman.

Sorry.

I meant, you're[1] pulling a strawman [2]

[1]
Article title: Richard Spencer to speak at University of Florida
URL: viewtopic.php?p=32709520#p32709520
Authors: Torocca
Publication date: 19 October 2017

[2]
Article title: Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
Website title: Yourlogicalfallacyis.com
URL: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Authors: Jesse Richardson, Andy Smith, Som Meaden
Publisher: Flip Creative
Publication date: 2016

I will point out the hypocrisies and the misinterpretations in your posts.

That's not how debating works, friend. You make the claim, you back it up. I don't find your evidence for you.

Yes, I am aware that people standing at a pedestal hold up and read out 150 pages worth of studies when making a claim in real life.

My evidence exists, you want it, you look for it. I don't do that for you, especially when it is two buttons away.

I hope you are not at university or considering it because at the moment you are not fit for it.

It's your claim. Source it and back it properly.

I am not required to make up for your laziness. This forum is not my personal attempt at writing a thesis or my doctorate with some requirement of referencing.

I do not lie, but I do not go out of my way to search for studies / books / newspapers / articles that confirm what I say when a simple google search can do just that. Would you go up to someone in real life demanding that? No.

For telling someone that they're lazy, refusal to source based on the belief that it will take awhile is hypocritical. Also, you're misinterpreting what debate is. This is not Wikipedia. You don't have to write 5 extra lines for sourcing. Like, according to these studies, blacks have lower test scores than white people do.

One sentence. Boom.

[Tahinar Tribes]

I can't just say "ALL JEWS ARE GREEDY AND WANT TO TAKE OVER BANKS AND MAKE US POOR" nor can I say "WHITES HAVE NO CULTURE"

The difference between your incoherent ramble and my post was that I was clearly referencing a study, whereas you're making a broad claim.

A study (which I specifically tailored to make it easily searchable on google) is something for you to mull over, not me.

Had I said "ALL BLACK KIDS PERFORM WORSE AT SCHOOL REGARDLESS OF WEALTH", you'd have a point. But to my recollection, I did not.

Yes, but you refuse - and still refuse - to back up that claim. As it is not our job to defend your point, we might as well had taken it as incoherent ramble, as you never posted this study as a source.

[Trumptonium]

The difference between your incoherent ramble and my post was that I was clearly referencing a study, whereas you're making a broad claim.

A study (which I specifically tailored to make it easily searchable on google) is something for you to mull over, not me.

It's still lies on your to source that study properly

I did that. By making it easy to search. In the time that you've spent replying to my OP, you would have found the study. In the time that you've spent arguing with me how you expect people to do things for you, you would have read all of it.

I'm finding it quite ironic that someone who insults my intelligence has to have basic debate philosophy explained to them.

You're not explaining anything else bar your inability to perform basic operations with a device with web connectivity.

I shall repeat: I am NOT writing a thesis, thus I will NOT source something I said that I SPECIFICALLY was aware was easily searchable on Google. It is faster for you to search than it is for me to enter hyperlinks.

[Torrocca]

It's still lies on your to source that study properly

I did that. By making it easy to search. In the time that you've spent replying to my OP, you would have found the study. In the time that you've spent arguing with me how you expect people to do things for you, you would have read all of it.

I'm finding it quite ironic that someone who insults my intelligence has to have basic debate philosophy explained to them.

You're not explaining anything else bar your inability to perform basic operations with a device with web connectivity.

I shall repeat: I am NOT writing a thesis, thus I will NOT source something I said that I SPECIFICALLY was aware was easily searchable on Google. It is faster for you to search than it is for me to enter hyperlinks.

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:

No they don't. Once you eliminate all other variables, race has nothing to do with it.

Black kids in rich white foster families sent to private schools make slower progress than white poor children with their biological family. Study.

A group of 130 Black kids in rich white foster families were in the 1990s tested to see whether the poor IQ performance of black kids were influenced by their environmental/socioeconomic factors. Whether it was age 7 or 17, the IQs of the black adopted cohort always performed worse than white foster kids or white biological kids, or mixed kids, both at IQ and in terms of GPA relative to the rest of the nation. In fact, black kids put into rich white foster families performed in the bottom half of the nationwide GPA at age 17, and by bottom half I mean the worst one third of society. The study concluded that socioeconomic factors had no bearing on the performance of black kids at school or at intelligence tests.

Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

[Tahinar Tribes]

It's still lies on your to source that study properly

I did that. By making it easy to search. In the time that you've spent replying to my OP, you would have found the study. In the time that you've spent arguing with me how you expect people to do things for you, you would have read all of it.

I'm finding it quite ironic that someone who insults my intelligence has to have basic debate philosophy explained to them.

You're not explaining anything else bar your inability to perform basic operations with a device with web connectivity.

I shall repeat: I am NOT writing a thesis, thus I will NOT source something I said that I SPECIFICALLY was aware was easily searchable on Google. It is faster for you to search than it is for me to enter hyperlinks.

It is also faster to enter hyperlinks while typing.
So instead of having to explain this to you, we would've been done with this.

how bout dem apples

[Trumptonium]

I did that. By making it easy to search. In the time that you've spent replying to my OP, you would have found the study. In the time that you've spent arguing with me how you expect people to do things for you, you would have read all of it.



You're not explaining anything else bar your inability to perform basic operations with a device with web connectivity.

I shall repeat: I am NOT writing a thesis, thus I will NOT source something I said that I SPECIFICALLY was aware was easily searchable on Google. It is faster for you to search than it is for me to enter hyperlinks.

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:

Black kids in rich white foster families sent to private schools make slower progress than white poor children with their biological family. Study.

A group of 130 Black kids in rich white foster families were in the 1990s tested to see whether the poor IQ performance of black kids were influenced by their environmental/socioeconomic factors. Whether it was age 7 or 17, the IQs of the black adopted cohort always performed worse than white foster kids or white biological kids, or mixed kids, both at IQ and in terms of GPA relative to the rest of the nation. In fact, black kids put into rich white foster families performed in the bottom half of the nationwide GPA at age 17, and by bottom half I mean the worst one third of society. The study concluded that socioeconomic factors had no bearing on the performance of black kids at school or at intelligence tests.

Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

Is this your first time on the internet? Because I won't be your guide.

The first result in all 197 countries of copying "A group of 130 black kids" will lead you straight to the study I was referring to.

If I wrote an essay or I was the topic creator or something was impossible to find without a hyperlink, I would have sourced anything I claimed. I did neither of the three. End of story.

[Torrocca]

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:



Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

Is this your first time on the internet? Because I won't be your guide.

I mean, it's not my problem you're calling me lazy while at the same time being too lazy to copy-paste a link. But I won't dwell on any of that.

[Tahinar Tribes]

I did that. By making it easy to search. In the time that you've spent replying to my OP, you would have found the study. In the time that you've spent arguing with me how you expect people to do things for you, you would have read all of it.



You're not explaining anything else bar your inability to perform basic operations with a device with web connectivity.

I shall repeat: I am NOT writing a thesis, thus I will NOT source something I said that I SPECIFICALLY was aware was easily searchable on Google. It is faster for you to search than it is for me to enter hyperlinks.

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:

Black kids in rich white foster families sent to private schools make slower progress than white poor children with their biological family. Study.

A group of 130 Black kids in rich white foster families were in the 1990s tested to see whether the poor IQ performance of black kids were influenced by their environmental/socioeconomic factors. Whether it was age 7 or 17, the IQs of the black adopted cohort always performed worse than white foster kids or white biological kids, or mixed kids, both at IQ and in terms of GPA relative to the rest of the nation. In fact, black kids put into rich white foster families performed in the bottom half of the nationwide GPA at age 17, and by bottom half I mean the worst one third of society. The study concluded that socioeconomic factors had no bearing on the performance of black kids at school or at intelligence tests.

Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

How's about a source for that rotten baloney?

Find it yourself, what am I, your servant?

Also why would we want to search "group of 130 black kids"? That's not the first thing that would've come to mind.

[Tahinar Tribes]

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:



Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

Find it yourself, what am I, your servant?

Also why would we want to search "group of 130 black kids"? That's not the first thing that would've come to mind.

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:



Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

Is this your first time on the internet? Because I won't be your guide.

The first result in all 197 countries of copying "A group of 130 black kids" will lead you straight to the study I was referring to.

Like I said.

"A group of 130 black kids" is an extremely vague term and I don't think anybody here would have thought to search it up. Especially when it was your job to show the studies.

[Alndar]

"I did that. By making it easy to search."

Show where in your post you specifically named this study of yours, thus making it easy to search? Because I can show where you didn't do that.

Let's look, shall we?:



Hmm, I don't see any names put in here for convenient, easy searching. Do you?

Is this your first time on the internet? Because I won't be your guide.

The first result in all 197 countries of copying "A group of 130 black kids" will lead you straight to the study I was referring to.

If I wrote an essay or I was the topic creator or something was impossible to find without a hyperlink, I would have sourced anything I claimed. I did neither of the three. End of story.

Which link on Google are you referring to as I am interested in it. There is multiple links here.