Don't get me wrong, I do believe that Iran shouldn’t have nuclear weapons..

[Odds]

They know they are not getting anywhere, but still flog that dead horse.

You have a stable full of replacement horses, very wise, but think of their welfare.
Thst said your being very wise in the advance you give to your frauds.

An unseasoned bowl of undigested word salad.

 

[King Billy]

You didn't add much -bearing in mind I deliberately said "significant", and not "the only".

Hardly news - we all know that nobody is born a racist, they all have to be taught to be one.

Not so. It's significant in our epigenetics.

You're talking nonsense. Genes has no influence on what prejudices we develop. That's a learning process, not a hereditary process.
Genes do have an effect on how gullible we are to succumbing to such issues as prejudices, myth belief, fairy stories, etc.
But they do not determine which prejudices we learn, which myths we believe, nor which fairy stories we adopt, that is solely a taught process.

Your argument is like saying our DNA determines which religion we adopt, or which football team we support, which is utter nonsense. Our DNA only affects how gullible we are to adopting fairy stories, or adopting the same loyalties as our peers.

It has nothing to do with epigenetics. Epigenetics is about our diet, the environment, etc affecting how our genes work, not determining our loyalties or prejudices. Epigenetic changes or effects are reversible, like the effects of smoking, poor diet, inadequate housing, etc.
For example a poor diet, smoking, inadequate housing, etc. will affect growth, intelligence, athletic ability, etc. Some of those ill effects can be reversed.

You 've made a number of assertions which are highly subjective, and challengable

Well challenge them, then. But please be specific about which assertion you think I've made, and you're challenging.

You could have looked at what "racism" really is and what we choose to include,

I could have done, but I wasn't discussing individual prejudices. I was discussing the gullibility of people to adopt the same prejudices as their peers, through the teaching/examples set.
So I didn't see it necessary to discuss individual prejudices. I was discussing "prejudices", not any specific one.

or the way just as an example, that in a troop of primates one born albino is usually killed by a troop member.

That isn't prejudice, that's fighting for dominance, while perceiving the albino as weak, lonely (i.e.socially rejected) and sometimes not recognised as belonging to the tribe (i.e. intruder, prey, etc).

It's easy to drop into a trope that anything one chooses to be bad, or good, must therefore be caused by one thing or another. It's not so simple.

That looks more like word salad, than intelligent comment. But just in case you meant it to be an intelligent comment, just badly expressed, who is dropping into the kind of trope you're suggesting?

 

[Vinty]

Holocaust denial is the negationist and antisemitic claim that Nazi Germany and its collaborators did not commit genocide against European Jews during World War II,

No

Have you never heard of Holocaust deniers?

When someone uses the term denier it makes them sound like some sort of religious fanatic.
There was a time when people who questioned the infallibility of the Pope were called deniers of the truth and were persecuted, often by excommunication or sacked from their jobs, social ostracism,censorship and imprisonment.

 

[King Billy]

The concept of "race" itself is a construct - it has no scientific basis, there's no evidence for it, it's just that some people have decided that different characteristics mean different "races". That then feeds into racism, another construct, where some people have decided that the other "races" they've invented are inferior, and unworthy of the same rights and treatment that they themselves enjoy.

...

Thanks. I didn't realise that Justin Passing had significantly edited his post after I'd quoted it.

 

[Justin Passing]

You're talking nonsense. Genes has no influence on what prejudices we develop. That's a learning process, not a hereditary process.
Genes do have an effect on how gullible we are to succumbing to such issues as prejudices, myth belief, fairy stories, etc.
But they do not determine which prejudices we learn, which myths we believe, nor which fairy stories we adopt, that is solely a taught process.

Your argument is like saying our DNA determines which religion we adopt, or which football team we support, which is utter nonsense. Our DNA only affects how gullible we are to adopting fairy stories, or adopting the same loyalties as our peers.

It has nothing to do with epigenetics. Epigenetics is about our diet, the environment, etc affecting how our genes work, not determining our loyalties or prejudices. Epigenetic changes or effects are reversible, like the effects of smoking, poor diet, inadequate housing, etc.
For example a poor diet, smoking, inadequate housing, etc. will affect growth, intelligence, athletic ability, etc. Some of those ill effects can be reversed.



Well challenge them, then. But please be specific about which assertion you think I've made, and you're challenging.


I could have done, but I wasn't discussing individual prejudices. I was discussing the gullibility of people to adopt the same prejudices as their peers, through the teaching/examples set.
So I didn't see it necessary to discuss individual prejudices. I was discussing "prejudices", not any specific one.


That isn't prejudice, that's fighting for dominance, while perceiving the albino as weak, lonely (i.e.socially rejected) and sometimes not recognised as belonging to the tribe (i.e. intruder, prey, etc).


That looks more like word salad, than intelligent comment. But just in case you meant it to be an intelligent comment, just badly expressed, who is dropping into the kind of trope you're suggesting?

You need some education, my friend. You don't know or understand enough to address the issue.
*We are born with some prejudices. If you think otherwise you're flat wrong, go learn.
I've already given you examples.
It's epigenetics, not genetics.
If you think something is word salad, it's because you don't understand it. Try harder.
It's like trying to explain to a Victorian farmer, how we get people flying round the moon.

Morqy - also using the usual style of criticism - not understanding much, so using the spotty stroppy youth approach of trying to object for objections sake without knowlege or thought. Just because you can think of someting to say doesn't mean it has the slightest merit.
Guessing, confusing and obfuscating where here's no need. Same reply - you need to go learn. And drop the trolling approach, which isn't worth responding to.
Perhaps you're both the same user.
You both attemp to criticise what you don't understand, you don't bring any information to the point like I did.
I'd hazard a guess that you both had to look up 'epigenetics', which I've been reading about for years.

Usual straw man silly arguments, etc etc give you both away.

 

[Brigadier]

You need some education, my friend. You don't know or understand enough to address the issue.
*We are born with some prejudices. If you think otherwise you're flat wrong, go learn.
I've already given you examples.
It's epigenetics, not genetics.
If you think something is word salad, it's because you don't understand it. Try harder.
It's like trying to explain to a Victorian farmer, how we get people flying round the moon.

Morqy - also using the usual style of criticism - not understanding much, so using the spotty stroppy youth approach of trying to object for objections sake without knowlege or thought. Just because you can think of someting to say doesn't mean it has the slightest merit.
Guessing, confusing and obfuscating where here's no need. Same reply - you need to go learn. And drop the trolling approach, which isn't worth responding to.
Perhaps you're both the same user.
You both attemp to criticise what you don't understand, you don't bring any information to the point like I did.
I'd hazard a guess that you both had to look up 'epigenetics', which I've been reading about for years.

Usual straw man silly arguments, etc etc give you both away.

Iirc, an experiment was conducted where rats were given an electric shock from a feed station or something after a light came on.


They then bred from the rats and, despite not receiving a shock themselves, the offspring already knew to avoid the feed station when the light came on.


Innate rather than learned behaviour then.
They therefore learned to

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Thsts fųcked your Saturday up. Your so angry

Not the first time today!

He makes himself such an easy target!

 

[Elsa TLC]

Not the first time today!

He makes himself such an easy target!

I do hope his Saturday improved.

 

[King Billy]

You need some education, my friend. You don't know or understand enough to address the issue.
*We are born with some prejudices. If you think otherwise you're flat wrong, go learn.
I've already given you examples.
It's epigenetics, not genetics.
If you think something is word salad, it's because you don't understand it. Try harder.
It's like trying to explain to a Victorian farmer, how we get people flying round the moon.

Morqy - also using the usual style of criticism - not understanding much, so using the spotty stroppy youth approach of trying to object for objections sake without knowlege or thought. Just because you can think of someting to say doesn't mean it has the slightest merit.
Guessing, confusing and obfuscating where here's no need. Same reply - you need to go learn. And drop the trolling approach, which isn't worth responding to.
Perhaps you're both the same user.
You both attemp to criticise what you don't understand, you don't bring any information to the point like I did.
I'd hazard a guess that you both had to look up 'epigenetics', which I've been reading about for years.

Usual straw man silly arguments, etc etc give you both away.

Total ad hominem, and not a vague sign of any intelligent argument put forward.
I have no intention of mud wrestling with pigs.

 

[King Billy]

Iirc, an experiment was conducted where rats were given an electric shock from a feed station or something after a light came on.

They then bred from the rats and, despite not receiving a shock themselves, the offspring already knew to avoid the feed station when the light came on.

Innate rather than learned behaviour then.
They therefore learned to

No-one is denying that epigenetic changes and learned behaviour can be transmitted to future generations.
But epigenetic changes are reversible. It depends on the gullibility of the individuals whether they are gullible to perpetuate the epigenetic changes, based on their learned behaviours and whether those learned behaviours are justified, or gullible/intelligent to adopt the reversals, when they realise the epigenetic learned behaviours were unjustified and unjustifiable.
It wouldn't take long to completely reverse the learned behaviour of lab rats.
Therefore fear, and prejudice is a taught response, and is reversible.

 

[King Billy]

Not the first time today!

He makes himself such an easy target!

I do hope his Saturday improved.

Anything sensible, or even on-topic to add, lads?