Your second and third links don't even mention race, though the second does conditionally postulate a superior gender (i.e., "if the post I'm replying to is correct, then women are inferior").
Ridiculous. Of course those specific words don't appear there, but that would be the most appropriate summarization of several of those posts.
Actually the OP was being charitable. He didn't even mention your superior gender arguments.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3316062
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3315959
But I guess it's easier to call me racist than to actually dig up some hard numbers, right?
[1] I'm assuming that by "superior race theory" you mean something along the lines of "genetic variation in intelligence causes some races to outperform others in school".
Absolutely uncalled for.
Flagged.
HN is not the kind of place to resort to racebaiting and it's unacceptable and you know that.
I'm not interested in any kind of debate about this. It just wastes my energy and brings me nothing. I will just point out that that's what he does when he chooses to do it. The onus is not on me to prove that black people are not dumb.
You have, however, exhibited two posts where I explicitly state that I don't know the cause of the school performance gap and that cultural factors are one possible explanation. But I guess that those are part of my secret plan to appear non-racist, right?
Seriously dude, get a grip. There are far fewer secret racists out there than you think, and I'm basically the last person to be secretive about his views. If I thought blacks were, e.g., genetically less intelligent, I'd clearly state my hypothesis and link to data backing it up.
[1] Unless by "clever", you mean "do better in school". If that's what you mean, then I'm guilty as charged - just like PISA, TIMMS, the College Board, etc.
I'm done with this argument, I don't think you deserve much more of my time.