rangaNando's (that peri peri sauce)
came in here to say nandos
it's top tier
popeyes close second
| Account Details | |
|---|---|
| SteamID64 | 76561198013620065 |
| SteamID3 | [U:1:53354337] |
| SteamID32 | STEAM_0:1:26677168 |
| Country | Bhutan |
| Signed Up | July 18, 2012 |
| Last Posted | October 19, 2026 at 11:33 AM |
| Posts | 5538 (1.1 per day) |
| Game Settings | |
|---|---|
| In-game Sensitivity | |
| Windows Sensitivity | |
| Raw Input | |
DPI |
|
Resolution |
|
Refresh Rate |
|
| Hardware Peripherals | |
|---|---|
| Mouse | |
| Keyboard | |
| Mousepad | |
| Headphones | |
| Monitor | |
rangaNando's (that peri peri sauce)
came in here to say nandos
it's top tier
popeyes close second
Nub_DanishmustardoverlordBut having the option to drink milk is a benefit eh?Nub_DanishmustardoverlordHow could being lactose intolerant being anything but inferior smhLsRainbowsNub_DanishLsRainbowsit supports the idea of differences based on ancestry not just black, white, yellow etc which supports the arrangement I've made that people are not inherently equal and your ancestry not race in the traditional sense does mean that people are genetically superior and inferior from one another not necessarily based on the race as in skin color and what not because race is not specific enoughNub_Danishhttp://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=79
i have more sources saying essentially the same thing about the relevance of race in medicine if you wanna get past the first paragraph of any of them
Are you trolling? This paper also says there's no basis for biological racial difference...like its right there in the title
I refuse to believe someone is seriously this dumb
this is a far cry from what you said earlier
Nub_Danishraces can be genetically superior to one another this is correct
But no, that paper is literally saying that race is a social construct, from the first paragraph to the last, perhaps you were confused by the wording?? i know words are hard
"As a biological rather than a social construct, “race” has ceased to be seen as a fundamental reality characterizing the human species. "
"If it were admitted that the category of “race” is a purely social construct, however, it would have a weakened legitimacy. Thus, there have been repeated attempts to reassert the objective biological reality of human racial categories despite the evidence to the contrary."
All of this ignores the other completely stupid part of the argument
Even if you can isolate some specific genetic trait as being isolated to one 'race' (for instance, caucasians being much more lactose-tolerant than most other groups), how does that make a race 'superior' or 'inferior'? That terminology is so loaded and meaningless
because you don't have to drink milk to live a happy life...?
Nah, it's fattening
messiahyeah mustard could you please stop having such a big boner whenever there's a thread or topic on tf2 comp history, you fucking dweeb
nope
Nub_DanishmustardoverlordHow could being lactose intolerant being anything but inferior smhLsRainbowsNub_DanishLsRainbowsit supports the idea of differences based on ancestry not just black, white, yellow etc which supports the arrangement I've made that people are not inherently equal and your ancestry not race in the traditional sense does mean that people are genetically superior and inferior from one another not necessarily based on the race as in skin color and what not because race is not specific enoughNub_Danishhttp://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=79
i have more sources saying essentially the same thing about the relevance of race in medicine if you wanna get past the first paragraph of any of them
Are you trolling? This paper also says there's no basis for biological racial difference...like its right there in the title
I refuse to believe someone is seriously this dumb
this is a far cry from what you said earlier
Nub_Danishraces can be genetically superior to one another this is correct
But no, that paper is literally saying that race is a social construct, from the first paragraph to the last, perhaps you were confused by the wording?? i know words are hard
"As a biological rather than a social construct, “race” has ceased to be seen as a fundamental reality characterizing the human species. "
"If it were admitted that the category of “race” is a purely social construct, however, it would have a weakened legitimacy. Thus, there have been repeated attempts to reassert the objective biological reality of human racial categories despite the evidence to the contrary."
All of this ignores the other completely stupid part of the argument
Even if you can isolate some specific genetic trait as being isolated to one 'race' (for instance, caucasians being much more lactose-tolerant than most other groups), how does that make a race 'superior' or 'inferior'? That terminology is so loaded and meaningless
because you don't have to drink milk to live a happy life...?
LsRainbowsNub_DanishLsRainbowsit supports the idea of differences based on ancestry not just black, white, yellow etc which supports the arrangement I've made that people are not inherently equal and your ancestry not race in the traditional sense does mean that people are genetically superior and inferior from one another not necessarily based on the race as in skin color and what not because race is not specific enoughNub_Danishhttp://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=79
i have more sources saying essentially the same thing about the relevance of race in medicine if you wanna get past the first paragraph of any of them
Are you trolling? This paper also says there's no basis for biological racial difference...like its right there in the title
I refuse to believe someone is seriously this dumb
this is a far cry from what you said earlier
Nub_Danishraces can be genetically superior to one another this is correct
But no, that paper is literally saying that race is a social construct, from the first paragraph to the last, perhaps you were confused by the wording?? i know words are hard
"As a biological rather than a social construct, “race” has ceased to be seen as a fundamental reality characterizing the human species. "
"If it were admitted that the category of “race” is a purely social construct, however, it would have a weakened legitimacy. Thus, there have been repeated attempts to reassert the objective biological reality of human racial categories despite the evidence to the contrary."
All of this ignores the other completely stupid part of the argument
Even if you can isolate some specific genetic trait as being isolated to one 'race' (for instance, caucasians being much more lactose-tolerant than most other groups), how does that make a race 'superior' or 'inferior'? That terminology is so loaded and meaningless
That scene isn't even offensive to gay people, it's "offensive" to overly macho pro wrestler stereotypes under the assumption that they're a) very homophobic and b) probably overcompensating for something
not to read too much into spiderman but yeah
sheepy_dogs_handidk i'm not saying there's anything wrong with not being white but from my point of view whites have accomplished more than a race like blacks. not saying there's anything wrong with the black race but the white race has accomplished more therefore in my eyes making it natural to be proud of being a part of that race.
even if this were a) at all accurate and b) not racist as fuck, it would still be hilarious that you're proud of the accomplishments of other white people, given you are an autistic basement dweller who has never accomplished anything in his life
I guess if u have to be a white supremacist to have self-esteem, go for it
I was on the fence about this one until I realized just how much homework I was failing to do because I was busy responding to him
It's so fun though!
-protoreligion isnt an accomplishment
I'm pretty sure sheepy would disagree, the list was tailored to him :D
-protook mustard you've hit ur post quota for this thread, time to find a new one!!
I will stop posting when the idiots stop being idiots
aka as soon as either I or the other people in this thread die
sheepy_dogs_handharvestyou LITERALLY just said white people should be judged better and treated better, then asked why you're being called a racist what the fuck
Sorry but i never said whites should be judged better or treated better. i said that whites have accomplished more which is a fact. I never anything about treated people differently. Try calming down and read things slowly next time.
too bad white people didn't invent civilization or agriculture or writing or mathematics or philosophy or science or religion then
I guess we should judge middle easterners as the best because they were the first to accomplish many of these things
oh wait, they're all muslim savages now, right sheepy???
We have discovered what happens when you take a deeply autistic child from his parents at a very young age and raise him in a klan compound
sheepy_dogs_handI'm proud of being white but how does that make me racist. Racism is disliking other races not being proud of your own.
"If you are born superior in certain aspects then you should still be proud of it."
"If you are born superior in certain aspects then you should still be proud of it."
"If you are born superior in certain aspects then you should still be proud of it."
P.S. people are prolly also -fragging you for the retarded second half of your post where you made it clear that you didn't read a single thing in this thread and have no idea what you're talking about
Nub_DanishmustardoverlordI mean he doesn't seem to have a problem with your opinion that people with gender identity issues need gender reassignment to help them. He's just stating from what he's seen it is treatable without gender reassignment. You seem to be more intolerant of him having this viewpoint, than he is of yours. This issue from what I've read the correct answer has not yet been determined and research is on going. Maybe if the research had been finished and a consensus reached by scientists as to what is correct you'd be justified in your aggressive shittalking of people with different opinions, but it's not so you are the bigot here tbh famNub_DanishmustardoverlordThe problem with arguing with you regressive lefties is whenever someone disagrees with you, you throw out the bigot card and sham themdollarlayerharvestwhere those credible sources at tho
Literally just google Gender Identity disorder. Last I checked a disorder refers to a treatable mental illness.
The actual source I was talking about which talked about it being closely related to anorexic people I can not locate. I randomly stumbled upon it a couple weeks ago and didn't bookmark it. If I find it I will post it.
too bad the APA website, which I already linked, seems to agree that you're an ignorant bigot
an ad hominem attack is only ad hominem if the insult takes the place of actual evidence
I gave evidence, and then used it to insult someone who was ignorant
Your reading comprehension skills are remarkably subpar given how confident you sound. I never said people with gender identity issues need "gender reassignment". Incidentally, there is no such thing as "gender reassignment", it's sexual reassignment because it changes someone's sex via surgery to match the gender they have in their head. In any case, as I already said in a previous post, many transgender people do not get SRS and choose to live pre-op for their entire lives. What hooli is saying is not that SRS is unnecessary, but that gender dysphoria can be "cured", via medication, to make people feel "male" or "female" again, because it's just a disorder like body dysmorphia is. This is utter nonsense and, as has been pointed out many times, the APA no longer subscribes to this view (even though they are historically very slow to change their mind on issues for far too long- see: homosexuality).
In the area I am talking about, the consensus HAS been reached.
Please stop acting so overconfident on issues you know absolutely nothing about.
showstopper, true to his name, has stopped the show.