> I'm the one that first brought up that you can't seem to
> formulate, express and defend a coherent argument on your
> own. You can probably parrot back whatever is said on the
> links you post, most trolls can, but to be able to
> independently field an argument coherently - I seriously
> doubt it.
>
> Let's take race as an example. In order to make your
> point about intelligence, race has to be a biologically
> meaningful term. You'll have fundamental problems with
> that.
> Let's take IQ as another example. First, you have to be
> able to make race a factor in intelligence on a genetic
> basis for it to have any meaning in the context of your
> argument, something you will have problems doing if race
> isn't really biologically meaningful.
> Then there is your apparently total and absolute
> ignorance of statistics, otherwise you wouldn't link to
> sources where the numbers are virtually meaningless in terms
> of the argument that you wish you could make.
> To build even a house of cards, the cards must be able to
> support each other. They don't and I doubt you're capable
> of even making it seem plausible that they could.
> Vance
