A University of Georgia teaching assistant who has made comments like “fighting white people is a skill” and “some white people may have to die” testified Friday in front of a student panel.
While Irami Osei-Frimpong has found himself the subject of a number of Campus Reform stories as a result of the aforementioned comment and others, his hearing concerned another matter entirely. Osei-Frimpong stands accused of violating UGA’s code of conduct by deliberately excluding a 2011 trespassing arrest when applying to the school, according to Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
He has also said "fighting white people is a skill".
In addition to falsely responding in the negative to an application question asking him if he had been charged or convicted of something aside from a minor traffic violation, Osei-Frimpong was also accused of neglecting to cite his previous University of Chicago studies.
The TA could be expelled for these alleged infractions.
But Osei-Frimpong and his defenders say that the racially-charged comments are the real reason behind scrutiny of the TA, AJC reported....
More total lack of self-awareness on display from DB. Do you have some realistic refutation of the scientific fact of IQ? Or just pictures and more strutting around like a rooster? LMFAO
The least self aware person on the entire form is going around projecting that fault on others, hilarious.
More total lack of self-awareness on display from DB. Do you have some realistic refutation of the scientific fact of IQ? Or just pictures and more strutting around like a rooster? LMFAO
The least self aware person on the entire form is going around projecting that fault on others, hilarious.
More total lack of self-awareness on display from DB. Do you have some realistic refutation of the scientific fact of IQ? Or just pictures and more strutting around like a rooster? LMFAO
The least self aware person on the entire form is going around projecting that fault on others, hilarious.
There's an argument (not).
Your India gets all their soldiers from the same pool they get their IT workers, is proposterous, and India refutes your modern military can only function if the country is below a certain IQ threshold on average. You failed, keep flailing though while you think you are winning, shit is hilarious.
The least self aware person on the entire form is going around projecting that fault on others, hilarious.
There's an argument (not).
Your India gets all their soldiers from the same pool they get their IT workers, refutes no modern military can function if the country is below a certain IQ threshold. You failed, keep flailing though while you think you are winning, shit is hilarious.
India's average IQ is above the minimum IQ required for a modern army. You need to pick a nation with a very low average IQ.
On this map, the nations colored red and orange have an average IQ below the minimum threshold for admission into a modern military.
Your India gets all their soldiers from the same pool they get their IT workers, refutes no modern military can function if the country is below a certain IQ threshold. You failed, keep flailing though while you think you are winning, shit is hilarious.
India's average IQ is above the minimum IQ required for a modern army. You need to pick a nation with a very low average IQ.
On this map, the nations colored red and orange have an average IQ below the minimum threshold for admission into a modern military.
You need to pick a bumfuck African nation with huge geographical and cultural impediments that built a modern military, or the conclusion for why they didn't must be average IQ and nothing but average IQ. Correlation equals causation fail, try again faggot, no one is deny facts, they are denying your conclusion based on the facts.
You think your conclusion is the only logical conclusion to those facts, and is in fact, a fact, but none of that is true.
Your India gets all their soldiers from the same pool they get their IT workers, refutes no modern military can function if the country is below a certain IQ threshold. You failed, keep flailing though while you think you are winning, shit is hilarious.
India's average IQ is above the minimum IQ required for a modern army. You need to pick a nation with a very low average IQ.
On this map, the nations colored red and orange have an average IQ below the minimum threshold for admission into a modern military.
You need to pick a bumfuck African nation with huge geographical and cultural impediments that built a modern military, or the conclusion for why they didn't must be average IQ and nothing but average IQ. Correlation equals causation fail, try again faggot, no one is deny facts, they are denying your conclusion based on the facts.
You think your conclusion is the only logical conclusion to those facts, and is in fact, a fact, but none of that is true.
No, genius. I made the factual claim that the nations colored red on that map have an average IQ that is below the minimum threshold set by the armies of most first world powers.
How does a soldier with an IQ of 67 calculate an artillery trajectory? How does a nation with an average IQ in the 60s or 70s even build artillery?
They only have so many potential troops above the threshold needed to fill those kinds of roles. It's not going to be as high as us where literally almost everybody except the mentally disabled meet that requirement.
No, genius. I made the factual claim that the nations colored red on that map have an average IQ that is below the minimum threshold set by the armies of most first world powers.
How does a soldier with an IQ of 67 calculate an artillery trajectory? How does a nation with an average IQ in the 60s or 70s even build artillery?
They only have so many potential troops above the threshold needed to fill those kinds of roles. It's not going to be as high as us where literally almost everybody except the mentally disabled meet that requirement.
You made some factual claims and backed it up with correlation equals causation fallacies, and other ridiculous leaps of logic, no one is taking issue with any of the actual factual claims you made just the conclusion you jumped to.
Also you ignored the "you don't need that high of an IQ level to operate an effective insurgency against a modern military" argument. You attribute far too much to IQ as the reason bumfuck Africa is bumfucked, and can't field a modern military, but average IQ in a region is but a tiny piece of the puzzle, not the major driving factor above all else.
Last edited by StCapps on Thu May 02, 2019 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
No, genius. I made the factual claim that the nations colored red on that map have an average IQ that is below the minimum threshold set by the armies of most first world powers.
How does a soldier with an IQ of 67 calculate an artillery trajectory? How does a nation with an average IQ in the 60s or 70s even build artillery?
They only have so many potential troops above the threshold needed to fill those kinds of roles. It's not going to be as high as us where literally almost everybody except the mentally disabled meet that requirement.
You made some factual claims and backed it up with correlation equals causation fallacies, and other ridiculous leaps of logic, no one is taking issue with any of the actual factual claims you made just the conclusion you jumped to.
Also you ignored the "you don't need that high of an IQ level to operate an effective insurgency against a modern military" argument. You attribute far too much to IQ as the reason bumfuck Africa is bumfucked.
No. You are naming fallacies you don't understand and assuming just throwing words around you misunderstand can get you out of your being totally wrong (yet again).
I made no argument. I stated one scientific fact (the average IQ of these sub-saharan African nations is in the 60s and 70s) and one demonstrable fact (every modern military has a minimum IQ threshold).
You apparently don't even know what an argument is, much less a fallacy.
