UCONN TO THE BIG EAST

Nice, further proof that politicians of any stripe will do anything for a vote (like Truman in his younger days although Im too lazy and disinterested to verify the Truman bit but I trust your research skills.)

These images are proof of nothing at all. They are fake.

Of course they are dummy and you can buy them and prove it

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=bill+clinton+buttons

Or you can argue with the right wing Washington Post dummy, which wrote a long article explain why they're not racist

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/06/22/what-those-clinton-gore-confederate-flag-buttons-say-about-politics-in-2015/?utm_term=.ce31a584e460

Or argue with these guys dummy

"During the 1992 presidential election, Clinton-Gore campaign pins featured the Confederate flag with the heads of the presidential and vice presidential candidates atop Confederate soldiers with the slogan “Sons of the New South” emblazoned across the button."

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/trumps-racist-recent-presidential-candidate-confederate-pin-clinton/

I don't mind that you're a racist who supports racist politicians dummy, but I do mind you lying about it, dummy.

Let's find common ground. The effect of what LBJ did in furthering JFK's legacy regarding the advancement of civil rights for minorities in the US furthered the common good to an indescribable degree. I don't know that it was de facto virtuous: I find horribly cynical the idea that minorities - and specifically black americans - cannot advance themselves without the help of white americans. But to the extent that the CRA codified things that should be self evident - that all men are created equal - kudos to LBJ for his role in advancing that notion. And that he was less charitable to other minority peoples - the yellow ones for example in Vietnam, millions of which he was responsible for murdering, we'll leave that for another day in the interest of comity.

In anticipation of my rapidly approaching death I've been bucket list reading the alleged classics that no one has ever read. Darwin eg: garbage. Finnegans Wake: incomprehensible garbage. Proust: boring incomprehensible garbage. Gibbon is the worst of the lot: that anyone spent 30 years rendering what was perhaps the most fascinating epoch in history into that sort of turgid leaden prose amplifies and confirms my complete contempt for human intelligence. I'd rather read Barbara Tuchman, and she's a broad, nearly.

I’m actually well schooled on ancient humans and humanoid species. I’ve been fascinated by it since I was a child and have traveled the world visiting archeological sites and caves.  You are just doing loaded google searches for confirmation bias. I’m trying to dumb this down as much as possible for your, my liege.

Race is not a social construct, but rather a series of evolutionary changes that take place when groups of people (or other flora and fauna) are separated for long periods of time.

Neanderthals and modern humans were separated for so long that they were considered different species by most scholars yet they were still able to interbreed—which is a bone of contention among some in the field who insist the ability to produce viable offspring means they are part of the same species.

All modern day humans besides subsaharan Africans have between 2-5% of Neanderthal in their DNA. Additionally, as I mentioned earlier, other groups of humans in south Asia and south have traces of Denisovan DNA. SubSaharan Africans have genetic admixture from at least one now extinct humanoid species.

SubSaharan Africans were separated from the rest of the races by as much as 130,000 years. That explains the phenotypic differences and IQ scores (I am not Asian or and Ashkenazi Jew so I don’t have a horse in the race on this topic). As a reference, Neanderthals and modern humans were separated for approximately 200,000 years before coming back in contact and eventually interbreeding.  Given another 50,000-100,000 years SubSaharan Africans and other races would have evolved into completely different species incapable of producing viable offspring.

Race gets less clear when you look into the differences beteeen other groups who were in constant contact and among people with mixed genetic for obvious reasons. Isolation is what drives genetic differentiation.

What you've written is factual.

Still no proof

Finnegans wake (didn’t get thru that,  pre translation programs). I think The man was quite mad when this was written.

Most but not all want to to make Socialism replace our American ideals.

I'm three quarters of the way through his biography. He was blind and a sot but evidently quite sane.

Maybe not clinically mad but certainly a bit off. After Ulysses in my opinion he had to prove he was more intellectual than his contemporaries so he wrote a book that you have to have another book to read, which is where I dropped out.  For my money Anthony Burgess combined an intellectual bent with fine prose. Had the best and strangest opening line ever, “I was in bed with my catamite when the Archbishop came calling”

I can't begin to imagine the mountains of evidence it would take to get you to admit you're lying.

Record hot temperatures recently. Women were recently given the right to vote. Perhaps there is some correlation.

Maybe not clinically mad but certainly a bit off. After Ulysses in my opinion he had to prove he was more intellectual than his contemporaries so he wrote a book that you have to have another book to read, which is where I dropped out.  For my money Anthony Burgess combined an intellectual bent with fine prose. Had the best and strangest opening line ever, “I was in bed with my catamite when the Archbishop came calling”

I think that you are the first human on the face of the earth to mention this possible correlation.

What I proposed as a possible correlation has been studied, written about and is believed by many. Including some individuals with actual Phd's in atmospheric science.

If you listen to environmentalists and climate advocates from Malthus onwards, doomsday is always around the corner but this specie somehow finds a way to survive and thrive ... 

What he means facetiously is that correlation does not imply causality.

I got that. I just wanted to point out that what I proposed is a prevalent school of thought in today's scientific community. Perhaps there is some basis for it.