View Single Post
Old October 15th, 2016 #1
Jerry Abbott
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 930
Jerry Abbott
Default Quora seems to have Jewish/Leftist Moderator Disease

I wasn't on Quora long before the leftist moderators there began hiding my answers. Here's the first one they removed.

Why is Neil deGrasse Tyson special? I don't perceive him as being particularly intelligent.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson might be as smart as his reputation makes him seem. He’s “black,” or, rather, he is an American mulatto, as you have no doubt noticed, and it’s true that his race has an IQ distribution with a mean that is downwardly offset from the mean of the white race’s IQ distribution by about 15 points.

However, statistics say little about individuals, and even a generally dull race can have exceptionally smart members. To predict how many smart members a race has, do the following:

The fraction, f, of a race having an average IQ of x̄ and a standard deviation in IQ of σ, which is above the minimum IQ of μ.

f(μ) = − [σ√(2π)]⁻ ∫(x̄,μ) exp{ −[(x−x̄)/σ]/2 } dx

You can avoid integrating the probability density function if you have a handy error function to call.

f(μ) = 1 − { 1 + erf [(μ-x̄)/(σ√2)] }

The IQ distribution of white people resident in the United States has a mean of 101.5 and a standard deviation of 16.4 points. The IQ distribution of US-resident mulattoes (typical ancestry 80% black and 20% white) has an average of 85 and a standard deviation of 12.4 points.

μ, f for whites, f for blacks, ratio

100, 0.5364, 0.1132, 4.739
110, 0.3021, 0.02189, 13.80
120, 0.1296, 0.002382, 54.43
130, 0.04112, 0.0001422, 289.1
140, 0.009448, 0.000004593, 2057
150, 0.001552, 0.00000007945, 19530
160, 0.0001805, 7.315e-10, 246742

Given equal numbers of randomly selected US-resident whites and blacks, you’d expect to find 2057 whites having an IQ above 140 for each black you found who had an IQ above 140. Since there are about five whites for each black in the United States, a random sample from US residents would be expected to turn up about ten thousand whites having IQs above 140 for each black similarly gifted.

But a ratio of ten thousand to one doesn’t mean that the one does not exist. Of the 40 million blacks in the United States, about 184 of them would be expected to have IQs higher than 140 and thus be certifiable geniuses. It is possible that Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is one of them.

I have read a paper by Dr. Tyson on the extinction of light from distant sources by interstellar gas present in a great many dwarf galaxies arranged along the line of sight. There didn’t seem to be anything wrong with it. The logic was straightforward, and the conclusions were unsurprising. Dr. Tyson’s co-authored paper on the iron abundance differences in the galactic hub and in the galactic halo are likewise fairly simple deductions from spectral data on Fe/H ratios. Nothing wrong with it.

Whereas I’ve yet to see anything from Dr. Tyson in the nature of cutting-edge theory, or anything that would confer “great scientist” stature on him, he does appear to do basic data analysis without any trouble.

Ignore the scolds who have answered you here. It would be understandable if Dr. Tyson’s skin color influenced your perception. Blacks are commonly less intelligent than whites. You should, however, remember that Dr. Tyson is an individual who has passed through a considerable number of social filters pertaining to his education as an astrophysicist that would tend to weed out the people who could not get that far. You’ll have noticed that there aren’t many black astrophysicists, and that Dr. Tyson (and John Johnson) are part of a racial minority of about one percent among astrophysicists, though it comprises about 13% of the U.S. population. Someone who doesn’t appreciate the effectiveness of those social filters would likely judge those exceptional blacks who passed them according to expectations appropriate for common blacks and would, thus, be misled.
The Quora Moderators told me that this answer violated their "Be Nice, Be Respectful" policy. Apparently, I was not sufficiently worshipful of Dr. Tyson.

It wasn't long before it happened again.

How did the Armenian Genocide begin?

Few people understand the true reason for which the Armenian Genocide happened. The most common (and mistaken) belief is that the motivation was Turkish nationalism. The promulgation of that incorrect view is largely the work of the Jews, upon whose ethnic relations most of the blame really does fall.

Because the Armenian Genocide was prompted, not by Turkish nationalism, but by the financial interests of a Jewish banking family, the Rothschilds. Although Turkish nationalism made it easier for the Rothschilds to manipulate the situation, and whereas a certain amount of ethnic strife preceded 1915, it was the meddling of these Jewish bankers that caused the genocide itself.

The Rothschilds owned (since 1884) the The Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company, which extracted oil from fields near Baku, in Azerbaijan, and shipped it over the Caucasus by rail to Batumi in FSR Georgia, thence by sea via the Dardanelles to their refinery in Fiume (a port city now called Rijeka, in Croatia) on the Adriatic. The products, including kerosene, were then sold throughout central Europe in competition with similar products sold by the Rockefeller-owned Standard Oil company. The Rothschilds wanted to eliminate ethnic conflict along the trade route, and since the Armenians were the weakest party in those conflicts, the cheapest way for the Rothschilds to get what they wanted was to eliminate the Armenians.

There is a photograph taken by a German officer in 1915 showing a row of young women who had been hanged upon crosses in mockery of the Crucifixion of Jesus because they had refused to convert to Islam. Many of the Young Turks’ “infantry” were, indeed, Muslims. But Jews were directing the campaign.

In conventional history, subject matter that is considered by the Jews to be sensitive may be presented in a way that is either inaccurate or incomplete—or both. Either important information is left out of the historical narrative, or else facts are replaced by elaborate lies. A good example of distortion by omission can be found in the summary of the Armenian Genocide.

Originally Posted by
On April 24, 1915, the Armenian genocide began. That day, the Turkish government arrested and executed several hundred Armenian intellectuals. After that, ordinary Armenians were turned out of their homes and sent on death marches through the Mesopotamian desert without food or water. Frequently, the marchers were stripped naked and forced to walk under the scorching sun until they dropped dead. People who stopped to rest were shot.

At the same time, the Young Turks created a “Special Organization,” which in turn organized “killing squads” or “butcher battalions” to carry out, as one officer put it, “the liquidation of the Christian elements.” These killing squads were often made up of murderers and other ex-convicts. They drowned people in rivers, threw them off cliffs, crucified them and burned them alive. In short order, the Turkish countryside was littered with Armenian corpses.

Records show that during this “Turkification”campaign government squads also kidnapped children, converted them to Islam and gave them to Turkish families. In some places, they raped women and forced them to join Turkish “harems” or serve as slaves. Muslim families moved into the homes of deported Armenians and seized their property.

In 1922, when the genocide was over, there were just 388,000 Armenians remaining in the Ottoman Empire.
As you can see, the article is reasonably explicit about the atrocities that took place during the Armenian Genocide, but it omits any slightest hint that Jews were leading the Young Turks or what the true reasons for the genocide were.

This is commonly the case with historical narratives concerning the instigators of the Armenian Genocide: the "Young Turks." What the historical narratives commonly omit is that the Young Turks were founded by a Jew who grew up in Italy, Emmanuel Curasso. Curasso set up the Young Turks as a secret society in the 1890s, beginning in Salonika, Macedonia. Most of the Young Turks, and virtually all of their leadership, were Jews.

This isn't really uncommon. The Jews have learned many tricks of political deception. They will go so far as to set up their own opposition, and, attributing its membership to other ethnicities—e.g. Muslims, Christians, racists—will later condemn these other groups for deeds that they, themselves, committed.

Here is a trivial example:

Most of the time, the corrupted version of history goes into the school textbooks unchallenged.

Assisting the Rothschilds wasn’t the Young Turks’ only purpose. They also wanted to undermine Sultan Mehmed in order to facilitate the theft of Palestine by Zionist Jews.

Many of the Jews among the Young Turks adopted nom de guerre. For example, the real name of the Young Turk writer known as "Tekin Alp" was Moishe Cohen. Also, the editor-in-chief of the Young Turks’ main newspaper, The Young Turk, was Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky, a Zionist Jew who worked as a journalist in Italy during the 1890s and lived in Odessa prior to the Armenian Genocide.

So, really, the blame for the deaths of 1.5 million Christian Armenians doesn't belong to any sort of nationalism. It belongs to greedy Jews who wanted their oil business to enjoy increased profits.
Apparently, naming the Jew is not to do, especially if it is true.

This went on for a while, and most recently Quora Moderation imposed a 1-week ban on my posting questions, answers, and comments, because of this answer:

Is racial profiling ever ok?

Racial profiling, like any profiling, is a valid statistical tool that is used to correlate people with behavior. It isn’t meant to predict the behavior of individuals, and it is wrong to say that profiling is “unfair” to individuals.

Profiling simply tells you where to look, if you want to find a specific kind of behavior with the greatest frequency. That allows administrators (and cops) to allocate their resources with greater efficiency.

Blacks are more violent than whites. Blacks are less honest than whites. Blacks commit murder at seven times the rate that whites do, on a per capita basis, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Blacks commit armed robbery at ten times the rate that whites do, on a per capita basis, according to the same sources.

In a typical year, somewhere between 12000 and 18000 white women are raped by black men, whereas, in contrast, fewer than 10 rapes of black women by white men become known to the police during a year. The black-to-white per capita rate ratio for the perpetration of interracial rape is about 3000.

I say it again: profiling isn’t intended to predict the behavior of individuals. It’s a statistical tool that tells the police where to look if they want to see the greatest number of crimes, and where to allocate their resources if they want to fight crime with the greatest effectiveness. The question of whether profiling is “fair” or not is irrelevant.
Quora Moderation sent me this email:

Originally Posted by Quora Moderation (email)
You are temporarily blocked from editing

We've noticed some of your recent answers violate Quora's Policies and Guidelines on Be Nice, Be Respectful. Quora works best as a knowledge-building community when its users are respectful to one another. Insults, harassment, and personal attacks are not allowed on Quora.

Because we've warned you before, you will be temporarily blocked from editing for 1 week. During this time you will be unable to:

* add questions, answers, or comments
* edit content (suggest edits, add/remove topics, etc.)
* interact with people or content (vote, follow, A2A, etc.)

Please note that further violations will result in the permanent ban of your Quora account.
I replied with this:

Your “Be Nice, Be Respectful” policy is a sham. You use it to shield from criticism those causes that leftists don’t want criticized. Let’s not pretend here. You can’t point to any statement of mine that is either false, or else both irrelevant and impolite.

In the first place, truth has a higher value than politeness does, and I’ll be impolite on every occasion that politeness would require me to lie.

In the second place, you have been using your “Niceness” policy as a stalking horse, behind which you control the information that becomes available to the general audience on Quora.

I’ve been through this routine many times on many forums, and I know how it ends. I will henceforth do all that I can to spread the word that Quora is not a place where the truth can be found when leftists think that it isn’t nice, nor when leftists think that saying it wouldn’t be polite.

Last edited by Jerry Abbott; October 15th, 2016 at 07:51 AM.