October 3, 2008
Is Ignorant Dogmatism Possible? I'm Afraid So.
October 3, 2008
The Lamps Are Going Out
October 3, 2008
What If the Median Voter Were a Failing Student?
October 3, 2008
Credit Default Swaps
October 3, 2008
How Government Used Fannie and Freddie
October 2, 2008
The International Angle
October 2, 2008
Cochrane and Rogoff on the PBS News Hour
October 2, 2008
Henry Waxman's Hearings
October 2, 2008
Economists' Bipartisan Bailout Opposition
It might be a good idea to replace "biology" with "genetic variability", both times.
In other words:
Liberals believe in science, but aren't racists.
Conservatives are racists, but believe God made them that way (the races and themselves).
talboito: "Conservatives are racists"
Where did that come from? How do you get "Conservatives are racists" from "Conservatives: Believe in biology, but not evolution?"
I *think* he means "racist = believer in significant race-based ability/behaviour differences".
Me, I'd stick with "racist = promulgator of race-based ability/behaviour differences", although that might be a bit unfair to those who *truly* believe that they aren't responsible for the consequences of what they say.
Even if our species did not have the population clusters that it does (for example, if in the future there is basically random mating for a long time), human-biodiversity would still be a fact of life ignored at our peril. Male vs female differences would also be far more difficult to eliminate.
Tom - brevity is the soul of wit.
Bryan - glad someone appreciated the quip