â„–2959778[Quote]
>Classic myth. Comparing infant pain to race realism as if they are remotely similar is dumb (but expected of Gold). Hey, dipshit, do you know why they even changed their minds on infant pain? Because new evidence emerged, which means that it wasn't deliberate denial. For this to even be comparable to infant pain, you would need to assume that all the researchers in the field are wrong, but that their very informed denial is because they actually aren't informed. Of course, you would rather claim that there is a large conspiracy against "poor race scientists", but then the comparison loses its power. Either way, you're dumb. And no, NIH does publish controversial research, very controversial research Race realists are just crybabies who are more pseudoscientific than parapsychology (btw the last paper is related to parapsychology). Take your anti establishment script somewhere else, ideally a credulous place.
â„–2959803[Quote]
WPR will leak at dis…
â„–2959871[Quote]
>>Classic myth. Comparing infant pain to race realism as if they are remotely similar is dumb (but expected of Gold). Hey, dipshit, do you know why they even changed their minds on infant pain? Because new evidence emerged, which means that it wasn't deliberate denial. For this to even be comparable to infant pain, you would need to assume that all the researchers in the field are wrong, but that their very informed denial is because they actually aren't informed. Of course, you would rather claim that there is a large conspiracy against "poor race scientists", but then the comparison loses its power. Either way, you're dumb. And no, NIH does publish controversial research, very controversial research Race realists are just crybabies who are more pseudoscientific than parapsychology (btw the last paper is related to parapsychology). Take your anti establishment script somewhere else, ideally a credulous place.