Somebody help me with this guy.

[Cainkane1]

http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=2422243645&frmid=68&msgid=1031295&cmd=show

This is the website of the guy I debated concerning evolution.

[CurtC]

"Page not found (707)"

[Marduk]

why bother, hes already made up his mind based on the colour of skin
;)

[Monketey Ghost]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/296004a5210888ec46.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=16869)

[CurtC]

why bother, hes already made up his mind based on the colour of skin

Did you actually find a page of content? I get only "Page not found (707)" when I click Cainkane1's link.

[Ysidro]

Did you actually find a page of content? I get only "Page not found (707)" when I click Cainkane1's link.

I get it. It's a "Blacks are good in sports" "argument".

[ParrotPirate]

I sort of got to the page,but then everything you click on goes back to that picture of one of the Williams sisters. I don't follow tennis,so I don't know which one that is.

[Cainkane1]

Hmmm I can't understand what the problem is. Oh well.

[CurtC]

I tried opening the page in both Firefox and in Google Chrome with the same result - page not found.

[Safe-Keeper]

Opened it in Firefox, and it appears to be an 'article' on how 'blacks excel in sports'. What, you mean like how Asians excel in math:rolleyes:?

[Agatha]

I sort of got to the page,but then everything you click on goes back to that picture of one of the Williams sisters. I don't follow tennis,so I don't know which one that is.It's Venus, who didn't win the women's singles at Wimbledon this year (Serena did). Roger Federer, who won the men's single title, is white, so what this says for the chap's theory is anyone's guess.
I can open it in Firefox.

[linusrichard]

Link works for me. It says:
(-removed- I'm not sure if posting this would run afoul of JREF rules.)

Some of the factual statements seem plausible, some of them don't. The conclusions are not convincing. I think there are other explanations for the observations. I'm not entirely sure what his point is. Is it as simple as "Blacks > non-blacks"?

[Marduk]

Opened it in Firefox, and it appears to be an 'article' on how 'blacks excel in sports'. What, you mean like how Asians excel in math:rolleyes:?

Or how black sportsmen excell in bodybuilding while white sportsmen excell in powerlifting
:p

[linusrichard]

Or how white guys drive like this, and black guys drive like this.

[linusrichard]

Oh, so the thread title was "Somebody help me with this guy."

Well, I suppose, going in order, first I would challenge his factual assertion that blacks dominate golf, tennis, baseball, MMA, motocross motorcycle racing, and soccer. Also the QB position in football. I would challenge anyone who's not a super sports fan to name me ten black athletes who are stars in golf, tennis, and football at the QB position.

The example of Tiger Woods seems ridiculous. He really should have left golf out of the equation. Consider that Woods is only "half black." Consider that there are no other black golf stars (by stars I mean people I've heard of - perhaps golf fans could point out some other black players). Consider that Woods had a fairly unusual upbringing that worked to ensure success at the game. Genetic factors do not seem like the most likely explanation.

Then I have a problem with the conclusions he draws from the best runners being Ethiopian and Kenyan. Wouldn't that suggest that genetics is less of a factor than, say, culture? After all, if it's genetic "blackness" (as if genetics were that simple) that determines success in track, wouldn't we expect to see success distributed among all the blacks of sub-saharan Africa, as well as those in Europe and North America? Why would it be focused on Kenya and Ethiopia, unless it had more to do with nationality than race - unless it had more to do with being raised in a Culture that Runs.

Most importantly, I would have to consider the effects of culture in the United States as the biggest factor contributing to black success in sports, and indeed black domination of basketball, football (other than the QB position), and track, as well as overrepresentation in baseball and probably some other sports. Consider economic conditions that correlate with race and make college and a career unrealistic for poor (i.e. black) children unless they can get an athletic scholarship.

These are just thoughts off the top of my head. I don't know if it's really worth arguing.

[Moochie]

Page opened all right with IE8.


M.

[Delvo]

The paragraph about race and sports is not what Cainkane1 is talking about. It's just a large and distractingly formatted automatic header/banner which appears at the top of every page of a forum, and what we're supposed to look at is some posts on that forum, which are shown below the banner. (Bad website design at the very least... and the link that's supposed to take you to this person's main home page uses a URL that ends with ".htmlcom", so you'd have to delete the "com" to make it work.) The subjects of the posts have nothing to do with the subject the banner is talking about. You just have to page down below the banner to see the actual page content.

That forum's format is to show one post per page, with links to the pages that show the other posts in the same thread. When I click the links, I get taken to pages which all start with that paragraph about race & athletics, but have separate content below (in a different font to set it apart from the banner, so at least they got one website design element right). In the pages for or posts other than the first, there's a link that says "View Entire Thread", which takes you to the first post, which has links to all subsequent posts in the thread.

So, on to the contents of the thread that we were linked to one post within (which seems to have been the wrong post to start at anyway, for what Cainkane1 seems to want us to see)...

The content of the thread is an argument that apparently started originally about some aspect of the theism/atheism dichotomy. The first page of the thread is this (http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=2422243645&frmid=68&msgid=1030892&cmd=show), by Cainkane1. However, Cainkane1 started it in response to another thread I only found by clicking the "Index" link and looking for the same title without the "Re:", and that thread is here (http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=2422243645&frmid=68&msgid=1030892&cmd=show). But even that thread is still full of references to prior posts by Cainkane1, Sleuth, and Marvin, such as "You ask me to 'define absrud'" and "You condemn my conclusions", so it's apparently just a continuation itself, from I don't know what other thread(s). These folks apparently tend to have a problem of starting new threads when they want to post responses to threads that already exist.

Worse yet, they don't format their quoting in any way, so a post by Cainkane1 contains a paragraph from Sleuth, followed by Cainkane1's response to it, followed by another paragraph from Sleuth, and so on, with no way for a reader to know which ones are which other than by reading prior posts, recalling which paragraphs you've seen before elsewhere, and figuring out which instance of it seems to be the oldest you've seen (but you still can't be sure because of the missing prior threads). And sometimes they repeat the same quote to give it two separate responses in the same long post, separated by lots of other text, as if just to make the post even longer.

And there's a LOT of this stuff, and none of it seems to be on the actual subject anymore; now they're just each talking about how bad the other person is and what bad arguments they made some time ago back when they were still actually talking about the subject instead of each other.

[linusrichard]

I can't read Sleuth's long snooty posts without being reminded of Otto from "A Fish Called Wanda":

Wanda: But you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?
Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.
Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it.

I don't know how to help - he's "learned" so much that you can't tell him anything, but he's somehow managed to get all that education without understanding the important parts.