User talk:Alden's Number Kid

Hello there RW. I hope to improve this site greatly by cutting back on the "SPOV" in controversies.
 * -- Goatspeed. 17:21, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Ryan_Faulk#Unnecessary_Information.2C_Logical_Fallacies.2C_Character_Attacks.2C_etc. 03:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Sean Last
Contact Last (since you said you've had communication with him) and ask him about the accounts and. I don't think they're him but a deranged impersonator known as Michael Coombs who has been creating fake accounts of other individuals for many years. The recent spam/vandalism on the article is the same insane person. Coombs never admits to his behaviour (he's a compulsive liar) but if you google search him you will see he has a history of getting banned on twitter/forums/blogs for doing same thing going back almost a decade.134.122.108.192 (talk) 18:09, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea who that guy is nor do I care. But sure, I don't think that Sean cares enough about this trashy website to come on here and defend himself from the nonsense on it. Every one of your arguments against HBD (Hereditarianism and Race Realism, especially Hereditarianism) are very generic and revolve around some insane and shit researcher (i.e. Nisbett) who will commonly cite a well established "flawed study". Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 21:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Hear, hear! I know that guy all too well... his MO is blanking/whitewashing our racialism (discredited scientific racism) related pages while whining about "sickeningly dishonest hit pieces" written by us. He keeps haunting us like an evil ghost, and I very recently had the honor of him harassing me specifically on my talkpage. Twice. -- Goatspeed. 18:21, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * There is literally no reason not to do that if you care about truth whatsoever. Especially the hereditarianism article, that was a joke. You guys did not understand Jensen's Rising Constraints argument at all. Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The same Jensen who was a regular article writer and on the "board of scientific advisers" for the neo-Nazi journal ? Falcon (talk) 21:47, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Genetic Fallacy and Guilt by Association. I hate saying this but "not an argument". Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 22:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

GrammarCommie's Blocking me From Editing
{ping|GrammarCommie} You entirely ignored the key word "some" and the irony of the statment. Wow. But anyways, I'll actually address this. We know that education differences between races fail to explain a significant portion of the BWIQG also see here but they might play a bit more of a (albeit small) role in the variation in intelligence within races. Don't even bother with "muh racism". Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 00:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * One, your sources are shit. Two, you removed someone's comment and edited my own. Three, you did this repeatedly. Four, you're arguing in bad faith and I don't actually give a fuck about your feelings. Five, tough shit. 00:23, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * One, genetic fallacy and you need to elaborate. Two, I thought it was a typo, my bad. Three, we were editing at the same so I saw my comment was removed so I tried to get it back, also, my bad. Four, ??? pretty bigoted. Five, just actually address the arguments in my source as many of them deal with the "racism hypothesis". Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 00:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * {ping|I'vebeenFrank} I will respond to your arguments here since GC blocked me due to a misunderstanding involving editing. Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 00:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * "Let's break down your example to show just how ludicrous it is."
 * I'll do the same.
 * "I will accept the first postulate."
 * Good.
 * "Wow, this one is really crazy. First, there's the qualifier "some," which debases this entire argument. I'll talk about this later. Second, you claim that making mistakes correlates and is caused by lower intelligence without previously establishing that. Not to mention "making mistakes" is an incredibly vague term including anything from not turning the lights in a room off after you leave to running late for a meeting to making a massive financial error. This further devalues this statement, as many of these mistakes have nothing to do with intelligence, unless you want to revert back to a 18th century understanding of neuroscience."
 * I have to admit that my logical argument here was ill formed and too vague. That is a good point. The problem is that I am simply causally referring to research that causally confirms the notion that IQ predicts credit score, job performance, etc. See, Strenze, 2015 for more information. Also, google "Twin Studies" to see the heritability of IQ (not talking about racial or group differences by the way, but if you want to get to that, we can discuss the X-factors and Variable Environments hypotheses and why they suck).
 * "Everything has a genetic component. This isn't comparable to your arguments on race and Down syndrome as you claim for both of them that genetics are the major influence and driver producing observable differences."
 * That first statement implicitly gives credence to my Post-Modernist position. There is phenotypic and genotypic variation to all traits and if you believe that some traits can determine inferiority and superiority, then some people are genetically inferior, even on traits like genetic diseases (see my cystic fibrosis example). And these differences are observable. Quite clearly, the difference between poor and rich can be phenotypically observed by looking at their houses, their health, etc.
 * "First, you haven't established that someone with lower intelligence is genetically inferior, showing a rather rudimentary grasp of logic. Let's once again touch on the "some" bit. It makes your argument meaningless. Just like some poor people are less intelligent, some rich people are. Some Americans are, some Europeans are, so on and so forth. But that does not and cannot from that phrasing imply that the entire group, or even the majority or a significant portion, are genetically inferior. If you were to use this in your race argument, it'd look ridiculous."
 * You misunderstand the entire point of my argument but the one good point you made was about the "some" which I agree with you on. The entire point of my argument was to dismantle the idea of "genetic inferiority" and "genetic superiority" from a Post-Modernist viewpoint so as to, from that, dismantle the "black people are genetically inferior" argument and declare it strawman status. Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 00:52, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * {ping|GrammarCommie} Also, to respond the following quote:
 * "Side note, "white"ness as a concept is historically been boarderline incoherent as a whole, and our modern conception of it as a catchall for light skin is in fact largely a contrivance to bloat the numbers of "white"ness."


 * First, don't use a loaded and misleading racial slur like "whiteness". Second, uh, are you actually going to backpedal the "Irish and Italians and X group of White People that have always been considered white aren't white" meme? Come on.
 * Bullshit, you dishonest yellow bellied toad. You knew damn well it wasn't a typo. I know this, because there were other typos in that post that you ignored. Like all white supremacists, you're a shit liar. And I see we're trying a variant of "TERF is a slur"... Mauvaise Foi indeed. 00:39, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I actually did think it was a typo. But you're making unfalsifiable and unverifiable claims now so let's just move on. Would you agree that "negroness" is a slur? If so, then it is easy to draw from that, that "whiteness" is a slur and derogatory term. Because it attempts to delegitamize the sociological group as a mere "fake construction" as if it is less of a legitimate group than any other.Alden&#39;s Number Kid (talk) 00:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't try to punch above your weight class kid, sociology is my domain. Whiteness is the philosophical conception of being white. When I type it with quotation marks, it is to signify that I'm talking about a philosophical construct. With that out of the way, "negroness" is am meaningless term unless one subscribes to racialist foundational premises of distinct "races", a completely horseshit categorical system with rules as arbitrary as Creationist "kinds". I know you're a liar because again, there were actual typos (first letter of the second sentence was uncapitalized) that you ignored, and "poor whites are smarter than poor blacks" is a common racialist talking point. Further, you removed an entire response, something I'm not inclined to believe you did "accidentally" given your very obvious bad faith. Oh, and I took your talkpage access away because your constant editing was preventing me from formatting your posts correctly. 01:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Since no one else has done this yet...
-- Goatspeed. 21:17, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Why was my account blocked?
I'm not that insane Michal Coombs guy. Alden&#39;s Number (talk) 21:44, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, really? Well, as I watched your activity on here, I noticed that you have the same pattern of behavior, same MO. Whining about "libel" on talkpages and then not taking "no" for an answer when your edits on the articles corresponding to said talkpages get reverted. That, and spamming nonsense about race on the same talkpages. -- Goatspeed. 22:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Eh, Michael's far more extreme and far more spammy. Still not an excuse for this guy's actions, but I think it's unreasonable to call him a Michael sock. IveBeenFrank (talk) 22:28, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * K then feel free to change his block settings and rationale back to what set them to and trout me. However, his alt still should remain banned, as he was still block-evading. -- Goatspeed.  22:52, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not a sysop yet, that's why I brought this to you. I do agree with you on his alt remaining banned. IveBeenFrank (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm only 15 years old but will find you and knock you the fuck out. Son of a bitch. Unblock my main account now bitch. Alden&#39;s Number 2 (talk) 23:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Your physical threat, while pathetic and impotent, shows that you're not worth dealing with. Bye. 23:04, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Fat pizza boy I will find you and knock you the fuck out and put your pizzas up your hairy ass. Alden&#39;s Number 3 (talk) 23:09, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you really think threatening Duce and I and calling me a "bitch" is gonna make us do what you want? You don't even scare me. I might just keep you permabanned for harassment, how about that? -- Goatspeed. 23:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This is apparently impersonation from Mikey based on a Discord convo I had. 00:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Nah, methinks he's just a different white nationalist, and the alt-right really is as much of a hivemind as I thought it was; IMHO the Mikey socks get a bit obvious when they start spamming user talk pages, whining about "sickeningly dishonest smear/hit pieces", going on and on about how Oliver Smith, Johns, and Bongolian are either meatpuppets or the same person, or call people "Antifas". While this person's and Mikey's MOs were somewhat similar, this guy's insults (see above) are too different than those of Mikey, who just reuses the same tired ones over and over again; we all know how unimaginative he is. -- Goatspeed. 01:52, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can Alden keep his talk page, please? I'd really enjoy having him around. Twodots (talk) 02:35, 26 November 2020 (UTC)


 * But why though? His obviously bad faith comments above don't really help his case. I took away his talk page access because if I didn't then he'd probably just keep on making empty threats and throwing around the word "bitch" like a 10-year-old who had just learned of its existence on the internet. -- Goatspeed. 02:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)