This content is a transcript of a debate between Daniel Hikushu (representing Islam) and Andrew Wilson (representing Christianity) on which religion is better for society. The core of their arguments revolves around traditional values, societal outcomes, and the impact of cousin marriage on intelligence and societal development.
Mind Map
คลิกเพื่อขยาย
คลิกเพื่อสำรวจ Mind Map แบบอินเตอร์แอคทีฟฉบับเต็ม
The reason Islam makes worse societies
is because they have a doctrine for
cousin marriage. Now notice Daniel
didn't say no no no no. You can't [ __ ]
your first cousin and marry her. No, no,
no, no. He didn't say that because they
he he probably believes that you should.
He probably believes it's fine. He
probably believes something about like
it protects inheritance or something
like this, right? Christians are also at
the mercy of the same kind of IQ
fetishists who want to transform the
human race. Wake up, Andrew. Wake up.
Stop this stupid argument. 30 more
minutes of Andrew saying that Muslims
are dumb. Okay, that's great.
>> Um, I'll try I'll try I'll try to be
more substant I'll try to be more
substantive than than that. So, just
Thank you so much for your kindness.
Thank you guys for being here. If you
guys aren't excited for this one, I
don't know what's going to do it. I am
thrilled for this debate. It's going to
blow your minds. It's going to melt
faces off. So, thank you for being here.
Buckle up. We are getting started.
So, as you know, the debate is
Christianity or Islam. Which is best for
society? Before we jump into that
though, what I want to do is introduce
our sponsor who helps make this possible
as these events are very difficult to
pull off. But we are proud to have as
our sponsor Maine first project as they
similar to modern day debate care about
free speech and fair debates. We're
thrilled to have Zach. It's been a great
time spending time with you today. I can
tell you if you if you guys folks reach
out to Zach very cool guy, very fun to
talk to. Zach, I want to say thank you
for being our sponsor. Main First
Project works on fighting for
conservativism in New England and
beyond. Thank you very much, Zach, for
being with us tonight. I want you to
>> Here we go, Crucible Crew. WHO'S READY
There we go. I'm loving this energy.
loving this energy. Now you have to
listen to me for a second here.
>> So Main First Project, we're taking the
fight to these leftists
>> in a state where they're originating.
They're the incubator for all these
leftist policies throughout this country.
country.
>> If you want to fight back and stem the
tide, you need to support Mainfirst Project.
Project.
>> Go to mainfirstpro.org
and please support us. Let's get on with
Thank you very much, Zach, for that.
We're going to jump into this. Indeed,
I'm going to introduce our speakers.
First, Daniel Hikushu.
He is an he is an American an American
Muslim commentator and Harvard grad who
debates religion and politics. He is
best known for his YouTube channel, The
Muslim Skeptic, where he critiques
modernity from a traditionalist Islamic
perspective. Please welcome Daniel Hookiku.
Also defending Christianity tonight,
Andrew Wilson runs the popular YouTube
channel The Crucible, which focuses on
politics, news, debates, and and
interviews, and also runs verbal combat,
a comprehensive debate course found at debateuniversity.com.
debateuniversity.com.
>> We're going to step
>> We're going to jump
We're going to jump right back. We're
going to jump right into it with Andrew
or with Daniel's opening statement.
Daniel, the floor is all yours for your
15minute opener. Thanks for being with
us. Can you hear me? >> Yes.
Just a quick quick note. I want this to
be a civil debate because right now
there's a massive Zionist campaign to
generate as much hostility between
Muslims and Christians as possible. If I
can say something nice about Andrew, I
respect him for not being a shill for
Israel. I think we can be civil, but
also very critical of each other's
religions without it turning vicious.
The only ones who benefit from a Muslim
Christian civil war right now is Israel,
which is stoking hate so that they can
continue to their genocide of both
Muslim and Christian Palestinians while
they bleed America dry. Let's keep that
larger context in mind. So the first
slide, which is best for society, Islam
or Christianity? Next slide. The answer
depends on which standard we use to
judge traditional or secular liberal
values. Traditional values include
belief in God, prayer, marriage and
gender roles, opposition to degeneracy,
and commitment to nation and shared
culture. Secular liberal values include
individual freedom, gender equality,
sexual autonomy, scientific progress,
and economic advancement. If we judge by
traditional values, Islam beats
Christianity hands down. If we judge by
secular liberal values, Christianity
comes out on top. The reason for this is
that Christianity since the
Enlightenment has been reformed and
adopted liberal values while eroding
traditional ones. This is because
Christianity is more open to evolving in
a way that Islam isn't. My opponent,
Andrew Wilson, claims to be a
traditional Christian, but we'll see if
he'll debate like a traditional
If he debates as a traditional
Christian, he should defend Christianity.
Christianity.
He should defend Christianity as
understood before modern liberal
reforms. For example, even though he's
Orthodox, I doubt he'll defend Byzantine
Orthodox norms such as theocratic
monarchy, monarch, the monarch's
authority to define church doctrine,
slavery, book bans, and speech
restrictions, death penalties for
blasphemy, apostasy, and pagan worship,
restrictions and bans on loaning money
with interest, minimum marriage age of
12, bans on divorce, mandatory veiling
of women with unveiled women labeled as
prostitutes, lashes for fornicators,
punishing married adulterers by cutting
ripping off noses or sewing them into
sacks and burning them alive. Execution
for homosexual acts. Limits on Jews
through bans on Jewish proitizing and
building new synagogues. If we look at a
timeline of Christianity for 1700 years,
Christianity upheld its preodern norms
of slavery, female subordination,
monarchy, punishments for blasphemy,
executions for adultery. After the
Enlightenment, Christians began
reforming their religion to match
secular values. And that liberalizing
process continues today with the
acceptance of homosexuality, LGBT
rights, and modern feminism. Even though
he's a conservative, Andrew already
accepts huge chunks of this liberal
reform. He's fine with abolishing
slavery, rejecting monarchy, ending
blasphemy, and adultery punishments. His
conservatism simply draws an arbitrary
line at a later stage, roughly 1950s
America. But liptard progressives follow
that same reform trajectory just a few
stages or steps further. Andrew isn't
defending traditional Christianity. He's
defending his preferred arbitrary
stopping point on a progressive path he
already agrees with. In other words, the
difference between him and the lipards
is quantitative, not qualitative. Just a
dispute over where to halt the same
ongoing cucking to secular liberalism.
So Andrew's conservatism is not
principled. It's arbitrary. Given this,
I predict Andrew will debate like a
blue-haired lipar today and use a
pro-liberal strategy against Islam
because again, Christianity can't beat
Islam on traditional values for the
simple reason that Islam isn't amanable
to reform the way Christianity is. So,
he'll likely attack Islam exactly like a
blue-haired alphabet person would by
calling Islam backwards on marriage,
gender roles, and scientific and
economic progress. But if Andrew attacks
Islam using secular liberal values, he
faces a dilemma because tomorrow he's
debating an atheist on whether
Christianity or secular liberalism is
better for society. So any pro-l Andrew
uses to judge Islam today, tomorrow that
same liberal standard can be used by his
atheist opponent to judge Christianity.
For example, if he says Christianity is
better than Islam because it gives women
more rights and promotes more scientific
progress and health, the atheist can
argue that secular liberalism does even
more of those things. Andrew knows this.
So against the atheist tomorrow he'll
likely revert back to a traditional
Christian stance, highlighting issues
like LGBT, incest, and low birth rates.
I'm not singling out Andrew. All
Christian debaters code switch. They
know Christianity isn't as based as
Islam on traditional values, nor as
progressive as secularism on liberal
values. Christianity is stuck in the
middle between traditionalism and
secularism. So to win against either
Islam or secularism, Christians have no
choice but to code switch depending on
who they're debating.
Putting aside this conceptual problem
with Christian apologetics, how do we
know that Islam is better for society
than Christianity? Again, it depends on
what values we adopt. Muslim and
Christians generally subscribe to
traditional values. In fact, all humans
due to biology inherently value things
like belief in a creator, marriage,
family, and community. So, let's see
whether Islam or Christianity is better
at promoting these things in society
using the abundance of empirical data
available. Let's start with a bird's eye
view using the World Value Survey, a
global project measuring beliefs,
values, and cultural changes in over a
100 countries. Their world cultural map
from 2023 groups countries by religion.
Protestant European countries are
yellow, Orthodox is red, European
Catholics are green, Latin America in
light blue, and Islamic countries in
gray. On the x-axis, countries that
value individual self-expression and
autonomy are further right on the graph.
On the y-axis, countries that are more
secular are higher up. The ones that
have more traditional values are lower.
So you can see in the bottom left there
are the Islamic countries that are more
traditional whereas the Christian
countries are more secular and value
individual autonomy. How about belief in
God? Muslim countries show higher
religiosity and belief in God than
Christians than Christian ones. For
example, Pew Research asked people in
different countries if they believe in
God. For nearly all the Muslim
countries, the number was 100% to such
an extent that Pew concluded that nearly
all Muslims surveyed believe in God.
Another Pew data set shows Muslim
countries Bangladesh, Indonesia,
Malaysia at the top of global belief
rankings, while Christian countries are
split with Kenya, Ghana, and the
Philippines high, but the US, Spain, and
France low. What about religiosity? On
this map, all Muslim countries are dark
purple showing the largest share of
religious followers. Christian countries
except Latin America are much lower,
like the US, Europe, and Russia. Pew
studied how important religion is to
people's lives. And for Muslim
countries, they're dark yellow,
indicating 80 to 100% of people saying
religion is very important to them.
While most Christian countries are much
lower in gray and blue, the 2024
integrated values survey confirms this.
In majority Muslim countries like
Indonesia and Egypt, over 97% say
religion is very important, whereas in
Christian countries like Mexico, the US,
Russia, and Germany, religion matters
far less. Another key metric is
religious switching. Pew shows
Christianity in red has the largest net
loss of followers, while Islam in green
has the highest net gain from
conversions. I think you're uh pretty
behind on the slides.
Yeah, there it is. All right. Now, let's
look at family and gender roles. Muslim
societies have higher rates of marriage
than Christian societies. Notice how the
percentage of marriage married
individuals of both Muslim women and men
indicated by the red and blue arrows is
higher than Christians since Christians
are more likely to delay or forego
marriage. We can also look at divorce
laws. Christian countries mostly allow
no fault divorce while Muslim countries
other often have fault-based divorce or
other limitations on women. When it
comes to fertility, Pew research shows
that Muslims are at 2.9 globally whereas
Christians are at 2.6. And even when you
break it down by region, Muslims in
Europe, the Asia Pacific, and subsaharan
Africa have more children than their
Christian counterparts. Muslims also
have the largest families by household
size. At 6.4 members per household
compared to 4.5 for Christians due to
both higher birth rate and higher net
conversions, Islam is the fastest
growing religion projected to meet and
exceed the Christian population in 25 to
50 years. How about sexual behaviors?
Research in American Sociological Review
show Muslims due to religious conviction
are less likely to have premarital or
extrammarital sex than Christians. Some
Christians might claim this is only due
to self-reporting bias because Muslims
are less likely to admit to engaging in
these behaviors. But we can account for
this by benchmarking against other
variables like medical abortions and
death rate from HIV AIDS which directly
correlate with extrammarital sex. Data
shows abortion rates are highest in
Christian regions and death from AIDS
are highest in Christian countries in
Africa, Russia, and Latin America, but
lowest in North Africa, the Middle East,
and other Muslim regions. Regarding
acceptance of homosexuality, Pew shows
Christian countries are far more
accepting even after controlling for
economic factors. Regarding attitudes
towards gender equality, word world
value survey asked whether men make
better leaders than women, do men have
more of a right to a job than women,
etc. They took the answers to these
questions to create a grading system
which shows that Muslims are far below
Christians. Now, if we were a bunch of
liberal simps, we would count this in
favor of the Christians. But since we're
all redpilled, we recognize that the
Muslim countries are based and the
Christians are sing. Same way when it
comes to other gender equality metrics.
Christian countries, whether in the West
or Latin America, Russia or Russia,
value gender equality more than Muslims.
That's a bad thing for many reasons.
Looking at other societal health
metrics, re research shows Christian
countries have much higher rates of
alcohol and drug abuse. Controlling for
economic differences, Muslim countries
have lower homicide rates than Christian
countries. Steven Fish's book, Are
Muslims Distinctive? Shows per capita
murder rates are significantly lower in
Muslim countries. Female homicide rates
are also lower. Rates of rape and sexual
violence are likewise lower in Muslim
countries and highest in Christian
countries. Multiple studies show that
the suicide rate for Muslims, it's much
lower than Christians. These stats show
Islam Islam outperforms Christianity and
upholding religion, marriage, family,
and community, making Islam better for
society. We can examine why Islam
consistently excels in these areas.
First, Muslims are much more attached to
religion than Christians because Islam
is more compelling and intuitive than
Christianity. For example, monotheism is
easier to grasp than the Trinity. Islam
is also more historically preserved.
Carbon dating confirms that the Quran
Muslims read today traces to the prophet
Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam. By
contrast, the Bible has evolved through
layers of editing and reflects the
theology of Paul for far far more than
the teachings of Jesus. Islam also has
better has also better preserves
traditional life and family through a
clear comprehensive
system of Sharia. Christianity, by
contrast, offers only broad, highly
malleable principles that different
Christian groups interpret in con
conflicting and often contradictory
ways. A Christian rebuttal could be that
even if Islam excels at traditional
values, it falls short on secular ones
like individual freedom, self-exression,
and scientific or economic progress.
Christianity, they could argue, wins
overall because it blends the best of
both worlds, preserving core morals
while still enabling the modern
achievements of the Christian West. more
freedom, science, technology, and higher
GDP. This argument has fundamental
problems, however. First, is western
prosperity due to is western prosperity
due to Christianity or secularism? For
example, how much of Western greatness
comes from pre-Christian traditions like
Greece and Rome? Furthermore, if
Christianity drives prosperity, why
haven't the oldest Christian nations
like Ethiopia and Armenia match the
West's success? Likewise, recently
Christianized societies like El Salvador
and the Philippines have no comparable
prosperity. Finally, why do more
devoutly Christian societies have higher
poverty and violent crime than more
secularized Christian ones? Therefore,
it's far from clear that Christianity is
the secret sauce to scientific and
economic progress. But there's a deeper
problem. Mixing traditional and secular
values never works. It's like mixing
paint and paint thinner. Whenever
societies try to combine traditional and
secular values, traditional values get
abandoned. This is actually what has
happened in the west which was deeply
Christian 200 years ago but now has
become the center of atheism and secular
decay. This didn't happen overnight.
This happened because Christians 150
years ago tried to mix traditional
Christianity with the secular idea of
progress. This happens because
traditional values are based on duties.
Preserving religion requires imposing
duties on people to worship. Preserving
family requires imposing duties limiting
sexual freedom and providing care for
children and the elderly. Preserving a
nation requires duties to uphold shared
norms, honor national symbols, or limit
immigration. So preserving traditional
values necessitates all these duties.
The problem is duties are hard work
requiring personal sacrifice. Because of
this, duties necessarily restrict
individual liberties while also
generating inequality and
discrimination. This is a problem for
secular liberalism, which strives to
free people burdened by duties. So the
secular liberal system gradually
eliminates duties to maximize individual
freedom. This is done through two means,
moral progress and scientific progress.
Moral progress means, for example,
liberating women by telling them they
don't have a moral duty to serve their
husbands. Scientific progress means
inventing AI companies for the elderly
so that little Bobby doesn't have to
spend time talking to grandpa. Usually,
we think of progress as a good thing,
but clearly progress can seriously
damage society because if you get rid of
duties, this will weaken institutions of
religion, family, and nation. The decay
has been ongoing in the West since the
18th century when liberal ideology
kickstarted moral and scientific
progress. Consequently, yes, the West
has the highest GDP, but religion,
family, and nation are weak, and people
live as atomized individuals pursuing
endless endless pleasure through
techdriven consumption. If you watch
tech elites shaping Western society,
you'll notice their transhumanist
vision, neuralink, AI, etc. This is the
logical endpoint of unchecked moral and
scientific progress. The question is,
which religion can stop this?
Christianity has already adopted liberal
sec sec secularism
sorry um
>> and reformed itself by those standards.
Even the most conservative Christians
like Andrew won't take the radical steps
needed to turn back the clock 200 years
and stop the inevitable transhumanist
future. The most radical thing that
Andrew calls for is banning Only Fans.
Maybe putting Christians in charge of
America's government so that they can
ban abortion, trans kids, and introduce
public prayer. This won't stop, let
alone this won't slow down, let alone
stop the freight train uh speeding
humanity toward destruction. Islam, by
contrast, offers the Sharia
comprehensive moral and legal sure a
comprehensive moral and legal framework
that governs every dimension of life,
individual conduct, family structure,
community obligations, and social order.
It does not merely tweak the secular
liberal system. It represents a
fundamentally different paradigm. And
because Islam preserves a duty-based
morality rather than dissolving it, it
retains the internal resources to resist
the liberal atomization and technical
technological dehumanization. Thank you
I've got the timer set for you, Andrew,
on your first word.
>> Good job, man.
The fun thing about debate is you get to
actually get in the mind of your opponent.
What? What happened? Oh,
Oh,
the fun thing about debate is you get to
actually get in the mind of your
opponent. You get to study and dissect
the things that they say and believe.
After watching Daniel for hours, a few
things became obvious. The first, he's a
far better Muslim apologist than I am a
Christian apologist. That's for sure.
but he's far weaker on politics than
myself and the nature of the world. The
second is that he's an above average
debater, but he ain't quite god tier.
See, if I were Daniel and fighting from
his worldview, I'd point out
Christianity is fractured and weak. That
Christianity is totally incapable of
fighting back against the degeneracy of
our time.
Uh its impetence has led to social
categories of degeneracy at levels
nobody could have predicted, especially
with the advent of the internet. I would
point out Muslim societies don't work
that way. That Muslims have feminism and
degens under control that everything in
modern-day Christians in the West are
fighting for against degeneracy Islam
has already achieved in their lands.
That's what I would do if I were Daniel.
When talking about which is better for
society, Islam or Christianity, uh, this
becomes a powerful argument. But I'd go
a step further if I were Daniel. I'd
also say my opponent will argue like an
atheist progressive that Andrew Wilson,
the guy who promotes anti-feminist and
egalitarian doctrine, is going to sit up
here and act like an egalitarian
progressive and cry about Islam being
mean to the women and cry about Islam
not being very nice to the gays. Well,
you were [ __ ] wrong. Sadly for
Daniel, while this tactic would normally
be effective against a sewing circle
Christian, I'm not part of that cast,
sir. Now, let me get into my argument
for why Christianity makes better
societies than Islam. And it's pretty
simple. Islamic societies breed an
inbred population.
>> Muslim inbreeding has been occurring at
a high rate for about 1,400 years since
the early Islamic period, encompassing
most of the land still occupied by Islam
today. It spread from the 8th to the
15th century, moved into Persia, North
Africa, South Asia, where it remains and
has created some of the dumbest [ __ ]
human beings on planet Earth.
The most common type of inbreeding is
first cousin marriage. The rates of
first cousin marriage uh in comparison
to Christian nations is staggeringly
high even in comparison to regions
occupied by Arab Christians. When a
nation has both Christians and Muslims,
Muslims are often double or higher than
Christians. Example, India, Lebanon.
Next slide, please.
Muslim inbreeding. Oh, sorry. Sorry
about that. Uh, Pakistan at 65%. 65%
65%
meaning more likely than not, you're
having sex with your cousin. And if
Okay. For the low IQ members of MDD,
that means these people are more likely
than not having sex with their aunts or
uncles children.
Saudi Arabia 50 to 58% with an average
76 IQ. Who would have thought it? UAE
54% 82 IQ. Uh the crown jewel of the
Arab world. You are more likely than not
to be banging your first cousin. Iran 40%
40%
80 IQ. Yemen 45% 62.9 IQ. Qatar 30% 80.8 IQ.
Now uh we we're going to continue right.
Oman 36% 78. Syria 39% 74 IQ. Turkey 25%
86 IQ. Jordan 32% 80 IQ. Egypt 32% 76
IQ. It goes on and on and on and it just
never gets better. Next slide, please.
Thank you. Compared to Christian
countries, let's take a look. Uh,
usually less than 1%.
Now, I wonder why Christians build
better societies, ladies and gentlemen.
Now, let's keep going. Uh, we want to
pull up the slide here. Moving right
along. uh as countries become more
Christian inbreeding declines right we
can see this uh from church intervention
in Spain 30 uh 20 to 30% post recon
uhista Catholic church banned cousin
marriages for commoners paple dispensations
dispensations
sold for royals Italy similar high rates
in the medieval period the church
enforced bans over the century France
high medieval uh canon law prohibited
marriage within 4° degrees of relation.
Modern Western Europe, it's not just the
cultural norm, but let me tell you
exactly how much of a cultural norm it
is. Even in European nations where
marrying your first cousin is legal,
they don't do it because of the ecclesiology.
ecclesiology.
Isn't that wild?
Africa shows the more Christians and
less Muslim the societies become, the
better they do. Let's just take a look
at Nigeria. Okay, we can go down the
list here. 50% Nigeria uh 20 to 30%
first cousin marriage. Isn't that crazy?
Now let's move right on down. You can
see South Africa Muslim 1.5%
uh very low on to negligible negligible
in the national prevalence of cousin [ __ ]
[ __ ]
you can look at the list. It's pretty comprehensive.
comprehensive.
We can continue to go. Right. The uh
bottom 20 least productive subsaharan
African countries. Wouldn't you know it?
They're all Muslim. 99%
99%
Muslim in Somalia.
Very high. 60% first cousins. Anybody
ever hear a joke about Somalian IQ?
Uh let's look over at Niger. 99% Muslim.
60% cousin marriage. First cousin
marriage. Let's take a look at Muslims.
When we're taking a look at uh Mal Mal,
uh it's a 90% population, high cousin
marriage. In other words, everywhere
Islam goes, the IQ goes like this
because they all are [ __ ] their
cousins. Not joking.
Go over to the next slide, please. I
want to show you the This is a famous
case. These are called the rat people of
Pakistan. It's a condition known as
microfalix. I think I'm pronouncing that
right. I have no idea. And it's caused
by excessive inbreeding. When's the last
time you went to a European country and
saw that? You don't see it.
Now, hang on. Next slide, please.
As we continue, let's just take a look
here at the casual link between cousin
humping and low IQ. Um, basically
there's increased homozygosity.
I think that that's how it's pronounced
for delletterious recessive genes and it
is the strongest causal link for why the
IQs are so low. Genetic risk inbreeding
raises the chances of inheriting two
copies of harmful recessive genes. Brain
development impact. Harmful genes can
impair neurode development, reducing
cognitive potential. IQ reduction
evidence. First cousin offspring lose
three to four points on average and
closer inbreeding can cause larger
deficits. They've been at it for 1,400 years.
years.
Higher prevalence equals greater risk.
Populations with widespread cousin
marriage show more individuals with
lower cognitive performance.
Generational compounding over successful
generations. Harmful genes accumulate.
One of the big Muslim copes you'll hear
you'll hear from Daniel tonight. Well,
it's only 1.5% for genetic f you know
problems uh for normal people who aren't
having sex with their first cousin.
Well, that's true. He says it's only it
only doubles to 3%. That's very low. No,
it compounds. See, if you hump your
first cousin and then those kids hump
their first cousin and their kids are,
etc., etc., etc. down the line. Guess
what happens to your IQ? Guess what?
You'll never guess. Anybody got to
guess? It goes down. The negative
consequences of a low IQ.
80 IQ versus 100 IQ uh person. Income 50
to 70% lower. Welfare dependency four to
six times higher. Literacy less than 10%
at less than 85 IQ. Obesity up uh almost
two times. Chronic disease up almost 2.5
times. Life expectancy less than 70 IQ
or 75 IQ down 5 to 10 years. Why?
Because well you might just look down
the barrel of that shotgun when you're
cleaning it. Moving over arrests and
incarcerations 3 to eight times higher.
Violent offenses four to six times
higher. Teen pregnancy three times
higher, child neglect and abuse three to
seven times higher. Intergenerational
poverty four four to six times. Almost
every study available shows that IQ
entering the low 80s Muslim countries
affects nearly every aspect of life in a
negative way. Economic pro uh prospects,
criminality, mental physical health,
happiness metrics and both at the
individual and societal level. In fact,
study shows that that when a country has
a sub 90 IQ average, they find it
difficult to have basic innovation,
infrastructure, professional class, and
other basic needs of a functional
society. Is that sounding familiar yet?
Now, here's the thing that's
interesting. Modern societies don't
require everyone to be a genius. Just
look at me. But they do rely on a
distribution of abilities. And you can
see their roles below. 70 to 85. Basic
job, practical skills, routine labor.
That's Islam. That's almost every
Islamic nation, ladies and gentlemen. 70
to 85, sometimes up to two standard
deviations lower.
85 to 100 would be skilled labor,
administrative support. 100 to 115,
professional, middle management. 115 to
130 engineers, scientists, doctors,
specialized roles, the things they
desperately need that they get from us.
130 plus innovation, leadership, high
level problem solving. Next slide,
please. inbreeding itself over
generations causes massively
um compounds that lead to negative consequences.
consequences.
And you can see the risk curve there.
You see how it I mean the the genetic
defects increase every single generation.
generation.
Moving over,
I just want to point this out on the
last slide.
Uh, Islam took an ethnic people that
were at the heart of being the top of civilization
civilization
and through generations of Islam and
inbreeding has turned them into the
lowest IQ some of the stupidest people
on planet Earth. Literally. You think
I'm being mean? I'm not. They're
literally some of the stupidest people
on planet Earth. Everywhere Islam grows,
inbreeding increases and societies
become worse. Where Christianity goes,
inbreeding decreases. So, societies do
better in almost every material way.
Let's just point out here as I wrap this up.
One second. So, it's clear here that my
argument summarized, though this isn't
its entirety, is that Islam creates huge
societies with large swaths of people
with IQ so collectively low they would
be considered developmentally
challenged, borderline [ __ ] here in
the West.
Not kidding.
Due to this side effect, force doctrine
becomes the order of the day.
Because the technological difference in
capabilities of each people group is so
vastly different, think Apollo mission
compared to Starship Enterprise. Islam
must literally bank on the benevolence
of Christians to not wipe them off the
face of planet Earth. They are basically
the feminists of the east. Totally
reliant on the goodwill and benevolence
of global Christianity not to just not
exterminate them, okay?
And take their resources, always
appealing to the mightier force for
their existence and the benevolence of
that very people group who Daniel today
is arguing doesn't make better
societies, which is a laughable
proposition. Even absent the degeneracy
of a people group, uh, a people group
must be able to competently defend
itself or bank on the benevolence of the
people group which can. And almost
everybody is going to prefer the society
that can. Imagine the irony here of
arguing against the very Christians you
find inadequate morally yet bank on
their moral benevolence to not wipe your
low IQ [ __ ] asses off the face of
planet Earth.
Thank you very much for that opening as
well. I wanted to quick take a moment to
say thank you to our friends at
Mainfirst Project for sponsoring
Debatecon 6 as they also believe in the
values of free speech and fair debate.
Mainfirst project is fighting for
conservativism in New England and
beyond. So check out their link in the
description box below. We are going to
jump into the five minute rebuttals.
Just a quick reminder folks, please be
sure your phones are on silent and also
please do refrain from recording or
streaming any footage other than if it's
a Tik Tok length that's fine. But we're
going to kick it into fiveminute
rebuttals. First with Daniel, the floor
is all yours. So this falls exactly into
what I predicted. You argued like a lipard.
lipard.
You you this falls into exactly why I
predicted you argued like a libtard. How
you're saying that success is on the
basis of IQ. Well, how are you going to
argue tomorrow when you debate with an
atheist that Christian IQ is higher than
secular atheist IQ? In fact, the atheist
IQ is much higher than Christian IQ. So
your entire standard for judging Islam
applies just as much much to
Christianity. And tomorrow when you're
debating the atheist, you'll have to
concede that your Christian religion is
associated or correlated with lower IQ.
Therefore, atheism or secularism is a is
better for society because it raises IQ.
Um this is so that's one point. Point
number two, where in the Bible does uh
it restrict cousin marriage? This as you
acknowledge is a later papal decree. It
was not a part of Jesus's teachings.
Jesus didn't come out and say, "Hey, if
you want to have a successful society in
the audience, I do want to ask you to
keep it down so we can hear the speaker."
speaker."
>> Jesus didn't say, "Oh, hey, if you want
success and you want to have a
prosperous society, you shouldn't marry
your cousin." Jesus never had this
apparently essential Christian teaching
that is the key s to success on earth.
That that's your whole argument against
Islam and is found nowhere in Jesus's
teachings. is found nowhere in the early
church fathers teachings. This is
something that came later and also when
it was decreed that cousin marriage is
considered to be um incest. It wasn't on
the basis of IQ. This is something that
you have adopted from who? From atheists
from secularists from those who are
doing secular science to discover these
uh medical problems or IQ levels. So
your your entire standard for judging
Islam is not a Christian standard. It's
not a biblical standard. It's not an
orthodox church standard. This is coming
only from atheists, from atheistic
science. Second of all, if if IQ is such
a end- all beall, Christian societies,
if you bring up a country list of
countries by IQ, many Christian
countries are on the bottom there. I
don't know if you consider them to be
true Christians because they're not
white, but they're also at 80 IQ, 70 IQ,
70 IQ. Look at subsaharan Africa. Look
at Latin America. Look at the
Philippines. It's also comparable with
Muslim countries. Do you consider them
to be Christians or not? Also go back to
the middle ages. IQ was much lower in
the middle ages in Christian societies.
Why that has changed is because of the
Flynn effect. IQ has increased globally
over the world across the world because
of the Flynn effect. So if you have a
problem again with lower IQ, look at
medieval or middle-age Christian societies.
societies.
And uh also here's another big problem.
IQ is also linked with race. So if you
want to prioritize high IQ, you should
discourage interbreeding between races.
Why should higher average IQ from Asians
or whites or Jews or whatever race that
has a higher average IQ? Christianity
encourages or allows interbreeding
between the races. That will result in a
lower IQ. So you should be against that
because that's going to over time lower
the average IQ of society. So that
should be something that you need to
oppose to be consistent. Inter
interracial marriage or interracial
breeding should be contrary to your
point or contrary to your position. Um also
also
yeah I mean I just shocked that your
entire argument about why Christianity
is better than Islam is a cousin
marriage argument. That's like shocking
because it just works so far against
you. So if IQ is the end all be all of
what makes a society good then
Christianity loses to atheism and
secularism like case closed. So like I
don't and many Christian societies are
low IQ as in the same way as certain
Muslim countries.
The thing about the difference between
me and you is I my values are based on
marriage, family, traditional values of
that nature, not atheistic values of IQ
and intelligence.
We're going to jump into Andrew's
rebuttal as well. The timer is set for
you. Five minutes, Andrew. Libtard
value. Don't [ __ ] your first cousin. Liptard.
Liptard.
Let me just point out that Daniel
Kikachu didn't actually rebut any of my
arguments. Not a single one. My argument
was simple and I'll repeat it here
again. The argument is that your society
has to rely on the benevolence of mind
to exist because of your general IQ. You
see, remember how I told you the 70 to
85 is basic jobs, practical skills,
routine labor. That's most Muslim
societies, sir. Doesn't matter if you
point out to exceptions to the rule.
Even in those societies in which
Christians have a lower IQ, guess what
you find? Their interbreeding rates are
going down. And when you compare them to
the same Arab population where they are
inbreeding, that that section of the
population, the IQ is always lower. So
what's my argument here? My argument is
that Christian societies are better
because they lower inbreeding, which
collectively takes your IQ so far down
the rabbit trail that you end up having
to beg the higher IQ individuals for
protection from them. You have to bank
on their benevolence. Imagine this guy
is banking on the benevolence of
Christians who have a high enough IQ to
basically eradicate all of the Middle
East. There's nothing they can do about
it. And they're banking on that
benevolence while telling you all that
you're immoral. You're immoral. This is
not an atheist argument far far and well
the argument here is based around what
it is that we're discussing and what are
we discussing which makes for better
societies right Christianity or Islam
how can you claim you have better
societies sir when half of your
societies are so inbred their IQs are
are like borderline [ __ ] how how
could this possibly be of benefit and
you know what they do when they go to
other countries they keep doing it. They
keep doing it. Now he says, "Ah, well,
if you if you value IQ more than all
other values, who said anything about
that?" The debate is not about that.
It's about which makes for better
societies. Now, who which society would
you rather live in? Would you rather
live in a society of donkey pull cart,
right? Donkey pull cart because we're
not smart enough to make car. We're not
smart enough to even have infrastructure
because we're at 70 IQ, 80 IQ,
borderline [ __ ] individuals. That's
a societ. Who's moving there? Who's
moving? Nobody. They're all moving here.
Why? Because they want the societies
that Christians have. By the way, let me
point a couple other things out. No,
Christians are not stupid. Yes, their
IQs are much higher. Much, much higher.
Even in non-white areas, they're much
higher, sir, because they don't inbreed.
And by it's very frowned upon. Go
figure. And interestingly enough, let me
just point this out that Christians have
a much smarter enemy. Much smarter enemy
that, you're right, they do have a high
IQ. You need high IQ people to combat
that with these values. Islam can make
no inroads. They don't have the
technology. They can't mount an
invasion. They can't even make a [ __ ]
power plant, right? How are they going
to do that? Daniel, what's your big
plan? His big plan is to bank on the
fact that there's su enough suicidal
empathy in the West to keep on importing
Muslims. That's about it. That's that
could be his only plan. These people
can't make armies. That requires massive
organization and mobilization. You think
that these people could ever attack the
West? That's a laughable prospect. He
started with Zionism. He has 10 million
Jews in his backyard. They can't do [ __ ]
about it. nothing.
1 billion versus 10 million. They can't
do anything. They launch their entire
missile payload. It does nothing because
of the IQ difference in these regions.
The IQ difference is so wide that if
they even tried to collectivize, it
would still be done and they know it.
And they can't collectivize anyway
because it requires a high enough IQ to
follow orders.
Okay. So, I don't that's my argument. My
argument basically is very simple. You
have to have a high enough IQ to have a
society to begin with. Christians make
it by lowering everywhere they go. You
[ __ ] your family members. My god.
Back to you, Daniel.
with that, we have 60 minutes of open
dialogue. though uh the open dialogue is
broken into 90 second segments just to
Daniel, we're ready for you for your
first 90 seconds. Sure. So, he said I
didn't address his argument that um
Muslims rely on Christian benevolence
because Christians have such high IQ
that they could just technologically
eliminate Muslims whenever they wanted.
Well, Christians are at the mercy of
atheists. Christians are at the mercy of
higher IQ atheists. Christians are at
the mercy of higher IQ Ashkanazi Jews.
Christians are at the mercy of China and
Asia. If you want to make a might makes
right argument, then we're in the same
boat, buddy. Muslims and Christians are
closer together in the same boat boat
compared to these other groups. So, this
is a self-defeating argument. Also, AI
AI is going to eliminate this so-called
advantage of IQ. AI is making it
irrelevant. I don't know why you're
laughing. AI is going to eliminate a
biological IQ difference between
different races, between different
religions, between different countries.
So that's a big problem for this kind of
IQ argument. You're talking about people
moving to the higher IQ West. Well, you
have Christians from Latin America
migrating on mass in the millions, 10
million over the past five years, coming
into the United States. They're coming
from Christian countries to the US. So
you think that they're coming because
it's a Christian country or is it
because of economic opportunity and many
people actually prefer to live in these
countries? You have people in the US
being passport pros and living in South
America because they're tired of this
[ __ ] hole United States unfortunately
what it's become despite the high IQ. 90 seconds.
seconds.
>> Why is that Andrew? Explain it.
>> We'll switch over to Andrew. I want to
remind you folks, please do uh
self-regulate so that we don't uh have
difficulty hearing the speaker. With
that, Andrew, the floor is yours.
>> Oh, sure. Yeah, you can make that
argument. There are some high IQ
Christian nations that move to even
higher IQ Christian nations, but none of
them move to Muslim nations. You're not
getting anybody to move over there,
Daniel, because you don't have
civilizations. You can't create
civilizations. He says AI is going to be
come along and solve it all. You got to
be smart enough to use the AI, Daniel.
You have to be smart enough to use the
AI. Remember, 70 to 85, that's your
societies. 70 to 85.
Basic jobs, practical skill, routine
labor. Doesn't sound like a bunch of
automation, robot building, AI, uh,
savvy individuals. To me, Daniel, he
points out the ideas of IQ. Remember, we
have to have a basic minimum for a
civilization about 98 to 100 to 115.
They don't have it. That's the
distinction in our civilizations. And
it's because of one value. Christians
outlaw screwing your own family members.
That's it. Simple. They outlaw it. It's
no good. And even in places where it's
legal, we must be adhering to the
ecclesiology here, Daniel, because where
it's legal, people still ain't banging
their cousins. That's your societies.
the ones that you build. And what you
have built is a collective of some of
the dumbest people on planet earth who
are at the mercy of Christians. And
don't don't try to cope and say, "No,
they're at the mercy of the atheists.
Give me a break." Everybody is at the
mercy right now of Western nations and
Western Christians which are in them.
And that includes Eastern Europe by the
way. So this is all cope. He hasn't
refuted any of the arguments. How can
you possibly say these low IQ societies
which Islam creates are better than the
ones Christians do on this one
principle? I want to hear it.
>> Go ahead, Daniel.
>> Yeah. So, you don't need to know how to
how I AI works to be able to operate it.
That's why it's a evening of the playing
field. I'm I don't know if anyone here
has used AI, but you don't actually need
to know how to program AI to be able to
use it. This is something that is very
obvious how AI is going to make IQ
differences really irrelevant in the
future. And this is what all of the
futurists are saying. Um, second of all,
you have Christians in more religious
Christian countries going to less
religious Christian countries. You have
again the subsaharan Africans. You have
the Latin Americans who are Christian
going into more secularized nations. So
this is again an argument for
secularism, not for Christianity. You
say that there are no Christians moving
to Muslim countries. What about all the
Christians in Africa, in the
Philippines, in Southeast Asia that go
to Dubai, that go to the UAE, that go to
Saudi? That is a counter example to your
really uh bizarre claim. Um you also
again look at what makes a society
great. I think that's the overarching
point that is so hard to believe that a
Christian would make this argument. I
value marriage. I value children. I
value having big families. I value
belief in God. I believe church
attendance or like religious uh
attendance to places of worship. These
are the things I find valuable. And I
showed you how within Muslim countries,
all of these things are higher despite
having a lower IQ, which I'll grant you.
Did you say over or 10 seconds?
>> No, you're you're good. That was 90
seconds. Go ahead, Andrew.
>> Yeah. So, this is really funny. Imagine
the irony of saying this.
>> Uh, well, Christians are moving to more
secular countries. Oh, so are Muslims.
Uh, what are you talking about? The mass
migration. No one's bitching about the
mass migration of the Christians right
now, are they? To Christian nations.
They're bitching about it the other way
around. Uh, really interesting, too. He
still hasn't refuted the argument. And
notice he does everything we get in the
air. He says, "We really value marriage
to our first cousins.
To our first cousins, we think it's
great. It's fantastic. We really value
it." It's like, "No, that's not a value
of mine, sir. And I don't think that
that's secular to say. It's not a value
of Christians to not want to have sex
with their family members. And by the
way, can you please explain even though
I've asked you many times how it could
be possible, sir, that you create better
societies than Christians where
everywhere Christians go based on their
ecclesiology, their ecclesiastic
authority, and the fact that they're
Christians, inbreeding goes down, making
sure that the IQ at least sits somewhere
around can function. Can you please for
for the love of all that is good? I
don't even care if you Google it at this
point. Just contend with the argument.
How are you making a better society with
inbin breeding and your Muslim values
which over 1400 years have produced the
dumbest societies on planet earth?
>> Wait, let me ask the audience a question
here. Sorry, let me ask the audience a
question. Are there are there electric
cars being developed in Latin America?
Are there are there AI new AI
technologies being developed in in
Brazil and Argentina? Are they being
developed in South in subsahar and
Africa? of these Christian countries cuz
they don't have cousin marriage, do they
Andrew? So why aren't they developing
all of these technologies, these amazing
technology, AI, nuclear weapons, fighter
jets? I didn't see Brazil or Honduras
producing any fighter jets, Andrew. Is
it because they don't have cousin
marriage? Why? They should be having
this brain blasting IQ in all these
Christian countries. Why is that not the
case? If Christianity is the secret
sauce, Andrew, then tell me why these
countries don't have those technologies.
Explain it. Because the reason I'll I'll
give you a spoiler alert because it's
not Christianity. It's not Christianity
and cousin marriage that causes this
discrepancy. AND IF YOU'RE SO HIGH IQ IN
THE UNITED STATES, how are you not able
to figure out birth rate, fertility
rate? Why are these countries going
extinct? Why is Europe going extinct?
Why is Christianity, these Christian
countries in Europe going, the
population is on a nose dive despite the
high IQ? They can't even figure out how
to reproduce at replacement levels. Gee,
I guess IQ leads to extinction because
it's correlated, right? The higher IQ
you have, the lower the fertility rate.
So, it seems like the more Christianity
you have, the more chances you have of
going extinct. Andrew, explain that for us.
us.
Well, if that were the case, you're in
big trouble because if it's the case
that your IQ stays the same and then
collectively secularist IQ goes up,
what's to stop them from wiping all of
you out and you can't do anything about
it? Your I your argument unfortunately
destroys you when you say, "Well, wait a
second. What about these South American
nations, right? Do are they?" Yes,
they're way more advanced than your
nations. Way more. Not even in the same
universe more advanced than your
nations. Yes. The truth of the matter is
is that the reason Islam creates worse
societies. We can bicker about theology,
right? Hey, I'm sure Daniel could
probably get me on some points there,
but you can't bicker on the facts. And
he hasn't contended with the argument
still. He's asked me a bunch of
questions. Did you actually hear an
argument, anybody? Because there isn't
an argument. The reason Islam makes
worse societies is because they have a
doctrine for cousin marriage. Now,
notice Daniel didn't say, "No, no, no,
no, no. you can't [ __ ] your first cousin
and marry her. No, no, no, no. He didn't
say that because they act he he probably
believes that you should. He probably
believes it's fine. He probably believes
something about like it protects
inheritance or something like this,
right? The thing is though is like can
we please get an argument for how a
society that doesn't at least have a 100
IQ so we can have middle management
isn't better than well donkey pull cart.
That's what I want to know. And please,
for the love of God, sir, when you say
it's not because of Christianity, the
entire historical record disagrees with
you. When pagans were at 20 to 30%.
Guess what? It was Christians who
brought that down.
>> And by the way, in all of the Muslim
shared nations with Christians and
Muslims, they're always lower IQ than
the Christians because they [ __ ] their cousins.
cousins.
>> Then time, we'll go over to Daniel. 90
seconds as well.
>> Again, throughout Christian history, you
had sub 100 IQ. throughout Christian
history. It's only because of the Flynn
effect in recent centuries that you have
this change. So all of the criticisms
that you're applying to Islam apply to
your past civilization. How were how did
you have a Christian civilization with
subund IQ? Andrew, was the Byzantine
Empire ashole?
They had sub 100 IQ. How did they have a
civilization without having positive 100
IQ? You can't explain that. You can have
a a a beautiful expansive civilization
and empire with sub 100 IQ because
there's other values that are
significant to human existence. Values
like marriage, family, God, worshiping
God. You don't need to be a positive 100
IQ genius to be able to love and be
devoted to God. I think that is actually
more of the Christian message than this
kind of IQ chauvinism that you're
presenting. This doesn't seem Christian
at all. This really doesn't seem
Christian. You keep talking about like
donkeys pulling carts. Uh, go to the
Philippines, bro. They're Christians. Go
to the Philippines. Go to some of these
African countries. Go to Batswana
Christian country. They have donkeys
pulling. So, they're apparently their
their Christianity and their lack of
cousin marriage is not helping them. So,
this is a really bizarre argument. And
all of you can laugh and chuckle it and
laugh it up, but it doesn't change how
stupid this argument is. If if if you
have okay if IQ is the audience end all
beall of civilization and the end all
beall of progress then why is the west
going in a nose dive all the things
Andrew that you brilliantly beautifully
criticized about the west the LGBTQ the
lack of marriage that's happening in
these non-cousin marriage countries so
clearly having the highest IQ so clearly
IQ is not the end all beall
>> switch it over let's take a look at the
first draw And did I ever say IQ is the
end all be all? No, of course not. Straw
man still hasn't told us how Muslims
build better civilizations when they
produce uh 70 to 85 IQ individuals who
are basically only suited for basic
jobs. Okay? He still hasn't told us
that. He can't he can't tell you he
can't tell you that these are better
civilizations. The reason that he can't
is because they're not. They're clearly
not. And the thing that's really funny
about this is like, let's just grant it.
Let's just grant that just for a second.
We'll just grant Daniel's argument.
We'll just pretend, well, you know, it's
okay to have a bunch of 80 IQ people who
can't seem to get past primitive
technology and are just day laborers.
But you know what? We don't do anything
degenerate. [ __ ] your cousin's
degenerate, Daniel.
That's degenerate. Yeah, baby. They
don't baby don't have hookers and only
fans girls, but [ __ ] your first
cousin is degenerate.
>> So So, by the way, and let me just point
this out and this is really really
important to point out. He has not made
an argument about how they produce a
better civilization. Only I have. My
argument is simple and still stands
unopposed. Where Christianity goes,
incest decreases based on canon law.
Where Islam goes, incest increases based
on their canon law. Therefore, where
Christians go, society gets better.
Where Islam goes, it gets worse. An
argument would sure be swell.
>> 90 seconds. We'll switch it to Daniel. I
I gave a argument that you failed to
respond to. I said that Islam when we
look at the statistics when we look at
all these countries on these metrics of
marriage, birth rate, household size,
reli belief in God, conviction in God, I
thought we were believers. Conviction in
God is higher in Muslim countries. Uh
holding on to your religious practice is
more in Muslim countries. Look at the
levels of drug abuse, alcohol abuse
being lower in Muslim countries. These
are all values that are good and we see
them associated with Islam, not
Christianity. That was my argument. So
you can't deny those statistics. So you
keep claiming that I have no argument. I
clearly do have an argument and I
refuted your argument. If IQ is the end
all beall, your entire argument is on
the basis of IQ. You haven't said, you
just say, oh uh marrying your cousin,
effing your cousin, that is degenerate.
On the basis of what? It's not on the
basis of your Bible. You just It's just
a degree. Yeah. Laugh it up. Laugh it up.
up.
>> I do want to make sure. Laugh it up.
>> I do want to make sure we can hear the speaker.
speaker.
>> Laugh laugh it up. Okay. Because as I
said, you are arguing on the basis of a
decree that was made. What is the actual
moral? Can you make a moral argument,
Andrew? Other than, oh, it lowers IQ.
There are many things that lower IQ.
Like I said, interbreeding with other
races, interracial marriage results in
lower IQ. So, is that degenerate as
well? Why can't you answer these
questions, Andrew, instead of repeating,
"Oh, you don't have an argument. You
have to respond to my argument." Okay.
Yeah. You've said that 10 times. Respond
to the points that I'm making.
>> Well, I don't. Here's the thing. It's
funny, right? The points that you're
making are in question form. Question
form is not an argument. They're
questions, not arguments. Perhaps you
should go to a higher IQ school. The
point is here, and this is super
important to point out, I have what's
called an argument, which means I made
an argument. That argument needs to be
refuted. Now, I would be happy to sit
here and answer all of your questions
today, Daniel, but you requested
specifically a forum where that's not
the case, where instead we do two-minute
monologues, probably because I would
tear you to pieces in a Socratic method.
Uh, but I would have been happy to do
that, too. People always misjudge. They
always seem to think, "Well, Andrew just
steamrolls debates and he's terrible at
these long form formal debates. It's
where I [ __ ] thrive." And let me just
point this out. Has anybody heard an
argument yet? He just says he just says,
"Well, uh, there's there's better
families and stuff." It's like, "Okay,
but you need to give us a standard, an
argument standard for why it would be
that these have better societies than
societies which can have, oh, I don't
know, skilled labor and middle
management." At the very least, that's
all I'm asking for. I'll concede. Hey, we've got some problems. We've got the O
we've got some problems. We've got the O of we've got the we've got the
of we've got the we've got the prostitution. We've got some pretty
prostitution. We've got some pretty horrible things going on over here. And
horrible things going on over here. And we have high IQ enemies that require
we have high IQ enemies that require high IQ enemies, right? And they're not
high IQ enemies, right? And they're not getting it from Islam. So my question
getting it from Islam. So my question just is this. Again, it's very simple.
just is this. Again, it's very simple. How do you make societies that can even
How do you make societies that can even combat this to begin with when you
combat this to begin with when you basically live in the stone age in
basically live in the stone age in comparison with technological
comparison with technological distinction? You live in the stone age.
distinction? You live in the stone age. Islam will get AI. We already got AI.
Islam will get AI. We already got AI. What are you talking about? So, I just
What are you talking about? So, I just want an argument. That's it. I want to
want an argument. That's it. I want to hear an argument for why Islamic uh
hear an argument for why Islamic uh nations are better than Christian
nations are better than Christian nations based on the fact that they go
nations based on the fact that they go and everywhere they go, they increase
and everywhere they go, they increase cousin [ __ ] and we don't, which
cousin [ __ ] and we don't, which lowers the collective IQ. I would
lowers the collective IQ. I would actually like a reputation there at some
actually like a reputation there at some point.
point. Okay, here is the argument. I'll put it
Okay, here is the argument. I'll put it in premise form so you can follow it.
in premise form so you can follow it. Take notes, Andrew. Premise one. Okay.
Take notes, Andrew. Premise one. Okay. societies that encourage marriage or
societies that encourage marriage or religions that can encourage more uh
religions that can encourage more uh better marriages, higher quality
better marriages, higher quality marriages, less uh being [ __ ] okay?
marriages, less uh being [ __ ] okay? less prostitution, societies that have
less prostitution, societies that have be bigger and more healthy families,
be bigger and more healthy families, societies that have more devotion to
societies that have more devotion to God, family uh societies, religions that
God, family uh societies, religions that encourage societies that are more
encourage societies that are more cohesive or s standing for each other in
cohesive or s standing for each other in a kind of nationalistic or communal way.
a kind of nationalistic or communal way. That religion that encourages more of
That religion that encourages more of that is going to be better is going to
that is going to be better is going to be a better religion. Premise two, Islam
be a better religion. Premise two, Islam does encourage all of those things. All
does encourage all of those things. All of those things I have mentioned and the
of those things I have mentioned and the stats I presented. That's premise two.
stats I presented. That's premise two. Therefore, conclusion, therefore
Therefore, conclusion, therefore conclusion, by deductive inference,
conclusion, by deductive inference, Islam is a better religion than
Islam is a better religion than Christianity. That is the argument. The
Christianity. That is the argument. The problem with your argument is that you
problem with your argument is that you say premise one, societies that have
say premise one, societies that have higher IQ are going to be better.
higher IQ are going to be better. Premise two, Christianity because it
Premise two, Christianity because it bans cousin marriage is going to lead to
bans cousin marriage is going to lead to societies with higher IQ. Therefore,
societies with higher IQ. Therefore, Christianity is better. My rebuttal of
Christianity is better. My rebuttal of this dumb argument is that premise one
this dumb argument is that premise one is wrong. Premise one is a false premise
is wrong. Premise one is a false premise that higher IQ does not lead to better
that higher IQ does not lead to better societies that and as proof I pointed to
societies that and as proof I pointed to the United States of America. I pointed
the United States of America. I pointed to many Christian countries that have
to many Christian countries that have low IQ and you and you haven't denounced
low IQ and you and you haven't denounced those countries. I gave many reasons why
those countries. I gave many reasons why your premise one is false. That is my
your premise one is false. That is my rebuttal of your argument. Get it?
rebuttal of your argument. Get it? Yeah. Um let's uh let's go through this
Yeah. Um let's uh let's go through this a premise at a time. First and foremost,
a premise at a time. First and foremost, the entailment of your argument would be
the entailment of your argument would be that low IQ societies are better. It
that low IQ societies are better. It would be that lower IQ societies are
would be that lower IQ societies are actually better, Daniel, which is
actually better, Daniel, which is hilarious because remember you rejected
hilarious because remember you rejected that as being a false premise. Uh P1, he
that as being a false premise. Uh P1, he says, "Soccieties require higher quality
says, "Soccieties require higher quality marriages. They [ __ ] their first
marriages. They [ __ ] their first cousins. How could that possibly be a
cousins. How could that possibly be a higher quality marriage, Daniel? I
higher quality marriage, Daniel? I reject premise one. I'm saying your
reject premise one. I'm saying your argument's not even sound. How can you
argument's not even sound. How can you have in any way, shape, or it's a
have in any way, shape, or it's a totally invalid? I reject it as even
totally invalid? I reject it as even being a sound premise. How could this
being a sound premise. How could this qualitatively be better to have genetic
qualitatively be better to have genetic deficiencies compounded over over a
deficiencies compounded over over a thousand years to the point where your
thousand years to the point where your civilization literally requires the
civilization literally requires the benevolence of all other civilizations
benevolence of all other civilizations so that they just don't wipe you out
so that they just don't wipe you out because you're not technologically
because you're not technologically advanced to do anything about it? You're
advanced to do anything about it? You're not technologically advanced. And by the
not technologically advanced. And by the way, when I say technology, I'm not just
way, when I say technology, I'm not just talking about like lasers and phasers
talking about like lasers and phasers and guns and things like that. Remember
and guns and things like that. Remember things like philosophy, that's a
things like philosophy, that's a technology, right? things like language
technology, right? things like language is technology things like social
is technology things like social communications and and businesses and uh
communications and and businesses and uh infrastructure these are technologies
infrastructure these are technologies you can't have these technologies when
you can't have these technologies when your IQ is 70 to 85 you can't you need
your IQ is 70 to 85 you can't you need to have the administrative and skilled
to have the administrative and skilled labor class and that requires at least
labor class and that requires at least at least 85 to 100 most of these places
at least 85 to 100 most of these places don't have it but 100 to 115 that's
don't have it but 100 to 115 that's pretty standard for these things though
pretty standard for these things though it's like look How could you possibly
it's like look How could you possibly say that the societies Christians build
say that the societies Christians build aren't better on a single principle that
aren't better on a single principle that we outlaw first cousin marriage? When
we outlaw first cousin marriage? When you outlaw first cousin marriage, you
you outlaw first cousin marriage, you see the collective IQ begin to increase,
see the collective IQ begin to increase, right? And you see that these
right? And you see that these technologies no longer unavailable.
technologies no longer unavailable. Technologies, medicines for children,
Technologies, medicines for children, things like this are now available. His
things like this are now available. His argument, his entire argument is
argument, his entire argument is actually we should keep our society
actually we should keep our society super low IQ because if we keep them low
super low IQ because if we keep them low IQ uh well they'll have more qualitative
IQ uh well they'll have more qualitative marriages and stuff.
marriages and stuff. >> What?
>> What? >> What?
>> What? >> We have to switch it over at 90 seconds.
>> We have to switch it over at 90 seconds. Go ahead Daniel.
Go ahead Daniel. >> Uh no I didn't say having lower IQ means
>> Uh no I didn't say having lower IQ means you'll have more marriage. You don't
you'll have more marriage. You don't understand causality. So the again the
understand causality. So the again the question is you had entire the vast
question is you had entire the vast majority of Christian history at sub 100
majority of Christian history at sub 100 IQ. Your assumption the premise that
IQ. Your assumption the premise that you're using is that you have to have a
you're using is that you have to have a o over 100 IQ average in your society to
o over 100 IQ average in your society to build civilization and to be functional.
build civilization and to be functional. But this is disproven by your own
But this is disproven by your own religious history. This is disproven by
religious history. This is disproven by all of Christendom prior to 1800 or even
all of Christendom prior to 1800 or even 1900. the 1900s actually. So just like
1900. the 1900s actually. So just like Christians could have civilization for
Christians could have civilization for uh 1900 years, uh Muslims have also had
uh 1900 years, uh Muslims have also had their civilizations that were also
their civilizations that were also thriving, that also had conquest, that
thriving, that also had conquest, that also had art, literature, poetry, all
also had art, literature, poetry, all kinds of beautiful things that we as
kinds of beautiful things that we as human beings value. It's not just IQ.
human beings value. It's not just IQ. You're taking this atheistic argument,
You're taking this atheistic argument, which is baffling to me. Why you as a
which is baffling to me. Why you as a Christian would have this kind of IQ
Christian would have this kind of IQ fetishism? You're not a white
fetishism? You're not a white nationalist. IQ is not the end all beall
nationalist. IQ is not the end all beall of human existence. I am happy. I'm fine
of human existence. I am happy. I'm fine with having a 90 average IQ country that
with having a 90 average IQ country that abides by traditional values that abides
abides by traditional values that abides by uh the be whether they be Christian
by uh the be whether they be Christian or Muslim. I actually prefer the low IQ
or Muslim. I actually prefer the low IQ Christian countries that value marriage.
Christian countries that value marriage. They don't have degeneracy. They don't
They don't have degeneracy. They don't have prostitution. I value those
have prostitution. I value those Christian countries even when they have
Christian countries even when they have a lower IQ, a 90 IQ, an 80 IQ. That's be
a lower IQ, a 90 IQ, an 80 IQ. That's be they're living beautiful lives. Yeah,
they're living beautiful lives. Yeah, you can make fun of them. Oh, they have
you can make fun of them. Oh, they have donkeys pulling their carts. You can
donkeys pulling their carts. You can laugh. But they're living beautiful
laugh. But they're living beautiful lives as Christians or as Muslims or any
lives as Christians or as Muslims or any other religious group.
other religious group. Well, I guess ignorance really is bliss.
>> Oh, good one. Oh. Oh, that was a neat one. Yeah. Oh man. Slapping your
one. Yeah. Oh man. Slapping your slapping slapping your dress. So,
slapping slapping your dress. So, >> let's let's point Let's point this out.
>> let's let's point Let's point this out. >> Let's Let's point this out. Let's point
>> Let's Let's point this out. Let's point this out, right? We just want to Look,
this out, right? We just want to Look, we haven't we haven't gotten personal
we haven't we haven't gotten personal with each other. We can go the rest of
with each other. We can go the rest of the debate. We both got a jab in. All
the debate. We both got a jab in. All right, that's fair.
right, that's fair. >> So, here's the thing, though, right?
>> So, here's the thing, though, right? This is still not a reputation of my
This is still not a reputation of my argument. He's the historical standard
argument. He's the historical standard is uh Christians had lower IQs back in
is uh Christians had lower IQs back in the day. Yeah. Uh, and they didn't build
the day. Yeah. Uh, and they didn't build modern civilization back in the day.
modern civilization back in the day. Modern civilization requires
Modern civilization requires professional middle management, 100 to
professional middle management, 100 to 115 IQ, right? 85 to 100 for skilled
115 IQ, right? 85 to 100 for skilled labor. What they're talking about is
labor. What they're talking about is just basic day laborers. These people
just basic day laborers. These people are very low IQ. And by the way, I'm
are very low IQ. And by the way, I'm going to even make the claim that
going to even make the claim that they're really choosing Islam anyway.
they're really choosing Islam anyway. They can't really think about it that
They can't really think about it that hard. Right? So the the question becomes
hard. Right? So the the question becomes right as we're as we're kind of diving
right as we're as we're kind of diving into this I just want to point out one
into this I just want to point out one more time the argument is around a
more time the argument is around a singular Christian principle. The
singular Christian principle. The singular Christian principle is that
singular Christian principle is that we're not allowed to marry our first
we're not allowed to marry our first cousins. That's in our ecclesiology. And
cousins. That's in our ecclesiology. And I don't care if you're a Protestant,
I don't care if you're a Protestant, right? Almost no Protestants do this,
right? Almost no Protestants do this, right? No Catholics do this. Orthodox
right? No Catholics do this. Orthodox this is forbidden as well. It's not that
this is forbidden as well. It's not that you couldn't find some sex somewhere,
you couldn't find some sex somewhere, some small society somewhere which
some small society somewhere which practices it. I'm sure that that's the
practices it. I'm sure that that's the case. But by and large and
case. But by and large and overwhelmingly, it's not. With Islam,
overwhelmingly, it's not. With Islam, the opposite's true. By and large and
the opposite's true. By and large and overwhelmingly, they do. So, we're
overwhelmingly, they do. So, we're basing this on a singular principle,
basing this on a singular principle, which is Christian. And that's what I
which is Christian. And that's what I want a reputation for. Why is marrying
want a reputation for. Why is marrying your first cousin for the purpose of
your first cousin for the purpose of building low IQ societies better than
building low IQ societies better than not doing that? Go ahead, Daniel. Again,
not doing that? Go ahead, Daniel. Again, it's it's not a causal relation. Islam
it's it's not a causal relation. Islam doesn't mandate marrying your cousin.
doesn't mandate marrying your cousin. It's not like we're saying we want to
It's not like we're saying we want to keep low IQ low so marry your cousin you
keep low IQ low so marry your cousin you keep getting the causal chain wrong
keep getting the causal chain wrong about this. Um the second point that I
about this. Um the second point that I want you to address is that when we look
want you to address is that when we look at IQ increasing that is associated with
at IQ increasing that is associated with more atheism. It is directly correlated
more atheism. It is directly correlated with higher levels of atheism. The
with higher levels of atheism. The higher the IQ goes the more people
higher the IQ goes the more people become atheists. Um this is a bad thing.
become atheists. Um this is a bad thing. I would assume that Christians would
I would assume that Christians would agree more atheism is a bad thing. I
agree more atheism is a bad thing. I think that yes, modern society is not
think that yes, modern society is not all it's cracked up to be. I don't know
all it's cracked up to be. I don't know if you guys have been looking around,
if you guys have been looking around, but it seemed like I've felt at least
but it seemed like I've felt at least myself that over the p past 5 years
myself that over the p past 5 years especially first with the pandemic and
especially first with the pandemic and now everything that's happening in the
now everything that's happening in the world where World War II is about to
world where World War II is about to break out. I think modern the modern
break out. I think modern the modern world is a dystopia. I am waiting for
world is a dystopia. I am waiting for you know nuclear holocaust to destroy us
you know nuclear holocaust to destroy us all. I don't believe in this absolute
all. I don't believe in this absolute value of modern society and therefore I
value of modern society and therefore I don't agree with your premise that high
don't agree with your premise that high IQ is something valuable in and of
IQ is something valuable in and of itself. There are many things to point
itself. There are many things to point out being wrong or bad with high IQ.
out being wrong or bad with high IQ. Again, I prefer to turn the clock back
Again, I prefer to turn the clock back 200 years where Christians had these
200 years where Christians had these traditional Christian societies. Muslims
traditional Christian societies. Muslims had traditional Muslim societies. Yeah,
had traditional Muslim societies. Yeah, you didn't have a laptop. You didn't
you didn't have a laptop. You didn't have internet. You didn't have cars. But
have internet. You didn't have cars. But guess what? You didn't have to worry
guess what? You didn't have to worry about your wife having to, you know,
about your wife having to, you know, being in college and sleeping with every
being in college and sleeping with every frat boy in the university and you don't
frat boy in the university and you don't even know her history because of
even know her history because of feminism. You don't, you have like LGBT
feminism. You don't, you have like LGBT degeneracy. You have elderly who are
degeneracy. You have elderly who are being shipped off to old folks homes
being shipped off to old folks homes because there's not a strong family unit
because there's not a strong family unit to take care of our own elderly children
to take care of our own elderly children are being shipped off to daycarees
are being shipped off to daycarees because there's not a strong family
because there's not a strong family strong marriage mom at home with
strong marriage mom at home with traditional roles to take care of the
traditional roles to take care of the children. I prefer the low IQ. I prefer
children. I prefer the low IQ. I prefer the low technology society. We have to
the low technology society. We have to switch it over. Andrew, 90 seconds.
switch it over. Andrew, 90 seconds. >> Can I just point this out that none of
>> Can I just point this out that none of those degenerate things that he just
those degenerate things that he just pointed out, which I agree with him, are
pointed out, which I agree with him, are the cause of IQ. I think you're having
the cause of IQ. I think you're having the problem with the causal link. Sir,
the problem with the causal link. Sir, let's point this out and this is really
let's point this out and this is really important to point out one more time. He
important to point out one more time. He didn't contend with the argument. The
didn't contend with the argument. The argument is how do you make a superior
argument is how do you make a superior society which is better for society? And
society which is better for society? And you know what? All you've done right now
you know what? All you've done right now is just argue this literally.
is just argue this literally. I'm Daniel Kikachu and I prefer a low IQ
I'm Daniel Kikachu and I prefer a low IQ society.
society. That's his argument.
That's his argument. Now look, I did not expect you to bite
Now look, I did not expect you to bite the bullet that you would have a
the bullet that you would have a preference for a low IQ society and
preference for a low IQ society and therefore we should continue to have sex
therefore we should continue to have sex with our family members to achieve said
with our family members to achieve said low IQ society. But over here on the
low IQ society. But over here on the Christian side, well, we're just not
Christian side, well, we're just not willing to do that. So, here's what's
willing to do that. So, here's what's really important here to remember. As
really important here to remember. As the argument structure goes on, Daniel
the argument structure goes on, Daniel is literally giving a prescription at
is literally giving a prescription at this point. He's giving you an ought. We
this point. He's giving you an ought. We ought to have dumb [ __ ] people. That
ought to have dumb [ __ ] people. That is his ought. My ought is different. My
is his ought. My ought is different. My ought is you being intelligent does not
ought is you being intelligent does not restrict you from Christianity or
restrict you from Christianity or Christian ethics. And we look at the IQ
Christian ethics. And we look at the IQ differentials in Christian nations and
differentials in Christian nations and we can see firsthand that that is true.
we can see firsthand that that is true. So the thing is is these are not
So the thing is is these are not mutually exclusive claims. When he says
mutually exclusive claims. When he says higher IQ leads to secularism, I could
higher IQ leads to secularism, I could just as easily say higher IQ leads to
just as easily say higher IQ leads to Christianity because all the Christians
Christianity because all the Christians are way higher IQ. So the thing is is
are way higher IQ. So the thing is is like uh which of those moral values
like uh which of those moral values would you not would you would do you not
would you not would you would do you not prefer? Which which of them? Which of
prefer? Which which of them? Which of these Christians don't want degeneracy?
these Christians don't want degeneracy? They're fighting against it as well. The
They're fighting against it as well. The only reason you've made these successful
only reason you've made these successful inroads is because your enemies are so
inroads is because your enemies are so stupid that you can conquer them. And
stupid that you can conquer them. And anytime you've tried to conquer the
anytime you've tried to conquer the technologically advanced West, you can
technologically advanced West, you can only do it via immigration. Because you
only do it via immigration. Because you cannot collectivize to spare yourselves
cannot collectivize to spare yourselves from the very nuclear war you're
from the very nuclear war you're currently terrified of because your
currently terrified of because your people groups are too stupid.
people groups are too stupid. >> It's over.
>> It's over. >> Go ahead, Daniel.
>> Go ahead, Daniel. >> How much time do we have, James, for the
>> How much time do we have, James, for the this
this >> 90? Uh,
>> 90? Uh, >> so the back for the this
>> so the back for the this >> back and forth we have until maybe it's
>> back and forth we have until maybe it's about 30 more minutes. Oh, well, okay,
about 30 more minutes. Oh, well, okay, that's good.
that's good. 30 more minutes. So,
30 more minutes. So, um, 30 more minutes of Andrew saying
um, 30 more minutes of Andrew saying that Muslims are dumb. Okay, that's
that Muslims are dumb. Okay, that's great.
great. >> Um, I'll try I'll try I'll try to be
>> Um, I'll try I'll try I'll try to be more substant I'll try to be more
more substant I'll try to be more substantive than than that. So, just
substantive than than that. So, just listen to this.
listen to this. >> Okay, so let's get into the we have
>> Okay, so let's get into the we have enough time to actually get into the IQ
enough time to actually get into the IQ science. Um, so first of all, Andrew,
science. Um, so first of all, Andrew, I'm not sure if you know this, but IQ is
I'm not sure if you know this, but IQ is more highly correlated with race than it
more highly correlated with race than it is with cousin marriage. Um, so race, if
is with cousin marriage. Um, so race, if you want to make this kind of IQ
you want to make this kind of IQ supremist supremacist argument, then it
supremist supremacist argument, then it will quickly become racial. And if you
will quickly become racial. And if you want to make that argument, just be very
want to make that argument, just be very clear about it. Does Christianity, like
clear about it. Does Christianity, like your worldview, promote um higher IQ
your worldview, promote um higher IQ races? Um, and everyone being at the
races? Um, and everyone being at the mercy of those higher IQ races. You keep
mercy of those higher IQ races. You keep making a might makes right argument
making a might makes right argument that, oh, Muslims are at the mercy of us
that, oh, Muslims are at the mercy of us high IQ Christians. Okay. Well, then
high IQ Christians. Okay. Well, then there are races that are higher IQ than
there are races that are higher IQ than others. So, are the higher IQ races uh
others. So, are the higher IQ races uh practicing benevolence by not wiping out
practicing benevolence by not wiping out the lower IQ races? That seems to be
the lower IQ races? That seems to be what your standard, what your morality
what your standard, what your morality actually entails pretty directly. So,
actually entails pretty directly. So, that please address the race issue. I'll
that please address the race issue. I'll give you a chance to respond, Andrew,
give you a chance to respond, Andrew, but I do want to be sure that this
but I do want to be sure that this doesn't veer off topic too far.
doesn't veer off topic too far. >> Yeah. So, I mean, that's really simple
>> Yeah. So, I mean, that's really simple uh to address. It doesn't really matter.
uh to address. It doesn't really matter. It doesn't really matter if that's a
It doesn't really matter if that's a coralate. You know what else is a
coralate. You know what else is a coralate? [ __ ] your first cousin.
coralate? [ __ ] your first cousin. That's a coralate. That's a massive
That's a coralate. That's a massive coralate for lowering IQ. It wouldn't
coralate for lowering IQ. It wouldn't matter if it was inherent, let's just
matter if it was inherent, let's just say, for instance, that uh white people
say, for instance, that uh white people had higher IQs on average than uh the
had higher IQs on average than uh the average Arab, right? Let's just say it
average Arab, right? Let's just say it for the sake of a hypothetical. It
for the sake of a hypothetical. It doesn't actually matter that much
doesn't actually matter that much because we know one thing that's going
because we know one thing that's going to bring the IQ down. [ __ ] your first
to bring the IQ down. [ __ ] your first cousin. So the thing is since that is
cousin. So the thing is since that is the case and it's objectively the case,
the case and it's objectively the case, right? I can still make the prescriptor
right? I can still make the prescriptor that your societies would be a lot
that your societies would be a lot better off if you had 85 to 100 skilled
better off if you had 85 to 100 skilled laborers, 100 to 115 IQ professionals at
laborers, 100 to 115 IQ professionals at least in middle management at least. And
least in middle management at least. And you've said it yourself right now.
you've said it yourself right now. You're terrified of nuclear war. We are
You're terrified of nuclear war. We are terrified of nuclear war all around the
terrified of nuclear war all around the nation, right? all around Muslim
nation, right? all around Muslim nations. You're probably terrified of
nations. You're probably terrified of Zionists who are right in your own
Zionists who are right in your own backyard. I get all of that, Daniel, but
backyard. I get all of that, Daniel, but your people group aren't smart enough to
your people group aren't smart enough to defend themselves against these people.
defend themselves against these people. Christian nations are. We're smart
Christian nations are. We're smart enough to defend ourselves from people
enough to defend ourselves from people groups who want to wipe us out like
groups who want to wipe us out like yours, right? So, that's that's what's
yours, right? So, that's that's what's important here. The reason why you need
important here. The reason why you need to at least have an IQ that's above I
to at least have an IQ that's above I prefer lower IQ, 70 to 85. The reason
prefer lower IQ, 70 to 85. The reason you need that is because you need to be
you need that is because you need to be able to defend and protect yourself. You
able to defend and protect yourself. You can't have these strong families he's
can't have these strong families he's talking about if you can't defend these
talking about if you can't defend these strong families he's talking about. You
strong families he's talking about. You can't have these great values that he's
can't have these great values that he's talking about if you can't defend your
talking about if you can't defend your own people group because you're at the
own people group because you're at the technological mercy of another people
technological mercy of another people group simply because you won't restrict
group simply because you won't restrict a single behavior. That sort of rigidity
a single behavior. That sort of rigidity has destroyed these once great lands.
has destroyed these once great lands. He's right. They did have beautiful art.
He's right. They did have beautiful art. They did have beautiful culture. They
They did have beautiful culture. They had beautiful everything and then Islam
had beautiful everything and then Islam came along and allowed them to inbreed
came along and allowed them to inbreed themselves into literal stupidity.
themselves into literal stupidity. So again, how do we not build these
So again, how do we not build these better cultures? I've refuted every
better cultures? I've refuted every argument you've had. All you do is make
argument you've had. All you do is make my argument for me.
my argument for me. >> Vote to Daniel for 90 seconds.
>> Vote to Daniel for 90 seconds. >> Yes. Is on. Okay. Um, so then also the
>> Yes. Is on. Okay. Um, so then also the other factor, uh, you didn't really
other factor, uh, you didn't really address the race issue and the logic of
address the race issue and the logic of your argument that we have to promote
your argument that we have to promote races that have high IQ or we have to
races that have high IQ or we have to accept that higher IQ races can dominate
accept that higher IQ races can dominate the lower IQ races. Guess what? You want
the lower IQ races. Guess what? You want to talk about um, Israelis dominating
to talk about um, Israelis dominating Palestinians because of low IQ. Guess
Palestinians because of low IQ. Guess what? Which race actually has a
what? Which race actually has a representative that controls every
representative that controls every member of Congress? like a handler, like
member of Congress? like a handler, like a Apac handler. What race are the Apac
a Apac handler. What race are the Apac handlers that are controlling Congress?
handlers that are controlling Congress? What What race are they? Are they white
What What race are they? Are they white Christians? Actually, Andrew, because it
Christians? Actually, Andrew, because it seems like 300 million Christians can't
seems like 300 million Christians can't take care of just maybe a handful, 10
take care of just maybe a handful, 10 million of that one particular race that
million of that one particular race that has a death grip over your country.
has a death grip over your country. Maybe address that, Andrew, the elephant
Maybe address that, Andrew, the elephant in the room. And then tell me about IQ.
in the room. And then tell me about IQ. Um, the other point that I want to make
Um, the other point that I want to make is that the Do I have to spell it out?
is that the Do I have to spell it out? >> Yeah, they're called Jews. They're
>> Yeah, they're called Jews. They're called Jews, Andrew.
called Jews, Andrew. >> It's called They're And there only 10
>> It's called They're And there only 10 million of them. There are 10 million of
million of them. There are 10 million of them, but they seem to have a lot of
them, but they seem to have a lot of control. Yeah. The thing about Israel is
control. Yeah. The thing about Israel is that they're able to dupe dumb
that they're able to dupe dumb Christians to support wars that are
Christians to support wars that are going to bankrupt America and cause
going to bankrupt America and cause America to really collapse so that they
America to really collapse so that they will have wars in the Middle East
will have wars in the Middle East killing Muslim brown people cuz you
killing Muslim brown people cuz you Christians apparently by your st by your
Christians apparently by your st by your argument Andrew are too stupid to
argument Andrew are too stupid to realize that they're being destroyed by
realize that they're being destroyed by this one particular group. Gee, that's
this one particular group. Gee, that's really high. That's really brilliant,
really high. That's really brilliant, Andrew.
Andrew. So,
So, >> actually, hang on. It's my turn.
>> actually, hang on. It's my turn. >> I'm done.
>> I'm done. >> Actually, it is really brilliant. Notice
>> Actually, it is really brilliant. Notice how Daniel is banking on the benevolence
how Daniel is banking on the benevolence of Christians to save him from a higher
of Christians to save him from a higher IQ people group. Just like I said he
IQ people group. Just like I said he would.
would. >> Banking on the higher IQ benevolence of
>> Banking on the higher IQ benevolence of the higher IQ people group to save him
the higher IQ people group to save him from another higher IQ people group.
from another higher IQ people group. Isn't that wild? It's almost like I
Isn't that wild? It's almost like I predicted everything you'd say before
predicted everything you'd say before you said it because I did. This is very
you said it because I did. This is very simple, right? His entire argument here
simple, right? His entire argument here that he's giving you right this second
that he's giving you right this second is let's talk about how these higher IQ
is let's talk about how these higher IQ people groups are controlling you the
people groups are controlling you the people I'm appealing to right now to
people I'm appealing to right now to please stop them from dominating our
please stop them from dominating our entire region do 10 million against a
entire region do 10 million against a billion dominated completely and they
billion dominated completely and they have to appeal to somebody else to
have to appeal to somebody else to protect them because they don't have the
protect them because they don't have the requisite IQ or technology to protect
requisite IQ or technology to protect themselves and that's that and that's
themselves and that's that and that's why you have to have at least some sort
why you have to have at least some sort of minimum IQ to some sort of
of minimum IQ to some sort of civilization which can at least
civilization which can at least contribute to your own nations and
contribute to your own nations and people groups protection. How could that
people groups protection. How could that be a worse standard? He wants to make it
be a worse standard? He wants to make it about race. He knows it's a red herring,
about race. He knows it's a red herring, right? It doesn't matter. It doesn't
right? It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if your race uh has the
matter if your race uh has the potentiality for like let's say 100 IQ.
potentiality for like let's say 100 IQ. Let's just say that that was the case.
Let's just say that that was the case. It was just stagnant at that for some
It was just stagnant at that for some reason. Then wouldn't why would we want
reason. Then wouldn't why would we want to reduce it below that? Why? That's the
to reduce it below that? Why? That's the dumbest thing that I've ever heard. So
dumbest thing that I've ever heard. So again, he makes my argument for me. Yes,
again, he makes my argument for me. Yes, he's appealing to the benevolency of
he's appealing to the benevolency of Christians to save him and his people
Christians to save him and his people group. That should be the [ __ ] if I
group. That should be the [ __ ] if I wish you guys are smart enough to get it
wish you guys are smart enough to get it that if that was the case that you
that if that was the case that you understood this, right, that you're
understood this, right, that you're appealing to a smarter people group to
appealing to a smarter people group to save you from another people group.
save you from another people group. That's why you guys have to get your IQs
That's why you guys have to get your IQs collectively higher. And you just said
collectively higher. And you just said you prefer lower IQ societies.
you prefer lower IQ societies. >> Daniel, I didn't appeal to anyone's
>> Daniel, I didn't appeal to anyone's benevolence. I just pointed out how
benevolence. I just pointed out how you're being used, how you're being
you're being used, how you're being treated like low IQ donkeys by a higher
treated like low IQ donkeys by a higher IQ race. That was my point. Like I know
IQ race. That was my point. Like I know you want to avoid acknowledging the
you want to avoid acknowledging the point that I made very clearly, but the
point that I made very clearly, but the audience does. The audience understood
audience does. The audience understood what I was saying about that. So no,
what I was saying about that. So no, it's not about benevolence of
it's not about benevolence of Christians. We don't Muslims don't need
Christians. We don't Muslims don't need the benevolence of Christians to protect
the benevolence of Christians to protect us. We've had a thriving civilization.
us. We've had a thriving civilization. And if Christians really want to win in
And if Christians really want to win in this kind of argument, this kind of
this kind of argument, this kind of might makes right way, you're losing
might makes right way, you're losing because of birth rates. simple as you're
because of birth rates. simple as you're losing because Muslims are uh not only
losing because Muslims are uh not only having more children, more people
having more children, more people convert into Islam as opposed to leave
convert into Islam as opposed to leave it. Whereas with Christianity, there's a
it. Whereas with Christianity, there's a massive swell of apostasy. People
massive swell of apostasy. People leaving Christianity for what religion?
leaving Christianity for what religion? Partly Islam, but the much bigger
Partly Islam, but the much bigger proportion, they're converting to
proportion, they're converting to atheism. They're leaving Christianity.
atheism. They're leaving Christianity. Why is that? Why? It's partly because of
Why is that? Why? It's partly because of a secular education. So this is you
a secular education. So this is you maybe you need to appeal to the
maybe you need to appeal to the benevolence of the atheists, the Jews,
benevolence of the atheists, the Jews, these other non-Christians because your
these other non-Christians because your religion is bleeding out. I showed the
religion is bleeding out. I showed the chart. I showed the chart in terms of
chart. I showed the chart in terms of religious switching from Pew. Instead of
religious switching from Pew. Instead of grandstanding and trying to puff out
grandstanding and trying to puff out your chest, address these real problems
your chest, address these real problems because it's not going to be there's not
because it's not going to be there's not going to be a Christianity in a hundred
going to be a Christianity in a hundred years if trends continue. And part of it
years if trends continue. And part of it is because of IQ. Ironically,
is because of IQ. Ironically, ironically, part of it is because of IQ
ironically, part of it is because of IQ because higher IQ is associated with
because higher IQ is associated with higher atheism.
higher atheism. So, yeah, you're going to have people
So, yeah, you're going to have people who will enjoy electric cars, maybe even
who will enjoy electric cars, maybe even flying cars and AI, but they're not
flying cars and AI, but they're not going to believe in God. Second, we'll
going to believe in God. Second, we'll switch it over. What's really
switch it over. What's really interesting here is just pointing out
interesting here is just pointing out that once again, he's making the same
that once again, he's making the same exact appeal. The appeal he's No, we're
exact appeal. The appeal he's No, we're not. We're not making an appeal. We're
not. We're not making an appeal. We're not making an appeal.
not making an appeal. Islam has fantastic civilizations as
Islam has fantastic civilizations as he's up here crying about how a nation
he's up here crying about how a nation of 10 million has enslaved all of them
of 10 million has enslaved all of them according to him, right? How how
according to him, right? How how sophisticated can your civilization
sophisticated can your civilization possibly be when 10 million people in
possibly be when 10 million people in the middle of a desert, right, are so
the middle of a desert, right, are so technologically superior to the entirety
technologically superior to the entirety of your civilization that even when your
of your civilization that even when your people groups have nuclear bombs, they
people groups have nuclear bombs, they don't feel threatened by it. This is a
don't feel threatened by it. This is a big problem. Again, this is not to talk
big problem. Again, this is not to talk about the whether or not Jewish people
about the whether or not Jewish people are superior to Arab people, white
are superior to Arab people, white people are superior to black people. Has
people are superior to black people. Has nothing to do with that. It has to do
nothing to do with that. It has to do with one thing, which is the prompt.
with one thing, which is the prompt. Which which religion promotes a better
Which which religion promotes a better society? Which religion produces better
society? Which religion produces better societies? And once again, I'm going to
societies? And once again, I'm going to make this argument. It's pretty easy. If
make this argument. It's pretty easy. If you think that people would have a
you think that people would have a preference, if you could ask them, which
preference, if you could ask them, which preference do you have? Do you have a
preference do you have? Do you have a preference to live in a society where
preference to live in a society where 65% or more of the people are inbred? Or
65% or more of the people are inbred? Or do you prefer to live in a society where
do you prefer to live in a society where that's not the case? And you're a
that's not the case? And you're a Christian, I think you would answer yes.
Christian, I think you would answer yes. And I think if you're an honest Muslim,
And I think if you're an honest Muslim, you'd answer yes, too. And why? Well,
you'd answer yes, too. And why? Well, it's because you still want medicine for
it's because you still want medicine for your kids. You still want to be able to
your kids. You still want to be able to drive on roads. You still want to be
drive on roads. You still want to be able to have basic infrastructure,
able to have basic infrastructure, skilled laborers, professionals, things
skilled laborers, professionals, things like this. And it's not that there's not
like this. And it's not that there's not many Muslims who aren't. There are. but
many Muslims who aren't. There are. but there's not enough to meet the demand
there's not enough to meet the demand because they produce really stupid
because they produce really stupid societies and it's because of this
societies and it's because of this reason. So, it's like he just keeps on
reason. So, it's like he just keeps on begging me to answer his questions about
begging me to answer his questions about degeneracy, which has nothing to do with
degeneracy, which has nothing to do with the debate. We're talking about which
the debate. We're talking about which society is better.
society is better. >> Yeah, degeneracy has to do with society,
>> Yeah, degeneracy has to do with society, bro. Degeneracy has a lot to do with
bro. Degeneracy has a lot to do with society. It's like pretty much your
society. It's like pretty much your entire platform. Uh talking about
entire platform. Uh talking about degeneracy ruining society. Um so like
degeneracy ruining society. Um so like the technology that the west has
the technology that the west has achieved you're saying that well look at
achieved you're saying that well look at all these Muslims the biomass is at the
all these Muslims the biomass is at the mercy of all these technologies the
mercy of all these technologies the fighter jets just the nuclear weapons
fighter jets just the nuclear weapons whatever but that technological prog
whatever but that technological prog progress is victimizing all of us we are
progress is victimizing all of us we are all a victim doesn't matter if you're
all a victim doesn't matter if you're Muslim Christian Jew Hindu we all are
Muslim Christian Jew Hindu we all are facing this massive transhumanist
facing this massive transhumanist behemoth this hegemony and it's
behemoth this hegemony and it's threatening to destroy the human race.
threatening to destroy the human race. Do you see the interview that Peter Teal
Do you see the interview that Peter Teal did with the New York Times and he's
did with the New York Times and he's talking he's talking about like the
talking he's talking about like the antichrist and he's being asked by the
antichrist and he's being asked by the interviewer, do you think the human race
interviewer, do you think the human race continuing is a good thing? And then
continuing is a good thing? And then Peter Teal, he's this billionaire,
Peter Teal, he's this billionaire, actually paused for a second and it took
actually paused for a second and it took him a while to answer. And when he
him a while to answer. And when he finally did answer, he said that, well,
finally did answer, he said that, well, you know, the human being in its current
you know, the human being in its current form, I don't know if that's something
form, I don't know if that's something worth preserving because they're
worth preserving because they're transhumanist. They want to see a future
transhumanist. They want to see a future where human beings are bionic. You have
where human beings are bionic. You have genetic engineering to actually have
genetic engineering to actually have tailor made babies based on people's
tailor made babies based on people's preferences. You have uploading the
preferences. You have uploading the consciousness to the cloud with
consciousness to the cloud with Neuralink, Elon Musk's Neuralink. All of
Neuralink, Elon Musk's Neuralink. All of these crazy technologies that are going
these crazy technologies that are going to be imposed on us. Remember the whole
to be imposed on us. Remember the whole thing, you will own nothing and you will
thing, you will own nothing and you will be happy. Get in the pod, eat the bugs.
be happy. Get in the pod, eat the bugs. Remember all of this agenda, especially
Remember all of this agenda, especially after COVID that they're rolling out.
after COVID that they're rolling out. That's because of technology. That's
That's because of technology. That's because of high IQ people like Uval
because of high IQ people like Uval Harrari, this Jewish genius who is
Harrari, this Jewish genius who is telling, "Hey, you don't need to own
telling, "Hey, you don't need to own anything to be happy. We're just going
anything to be happy. We're just going to give you porn and we're going to give
to give you porn and we're going to give you drugs and you're going to live in
you drugs and you're going to live in the pod and that's going to be the
the pod and that's going to be the future." That affects all of us. So,
future." That affects all of us. So, it's not just Muslims who are the
it's not just Muslims who are the victims of this technological future. We
victims of this technological future. We are all victims of that dystopia.
are all victims of that dystopia. Let us point out here that this is very
Let us point out here that this is very important again that everywhere Islam
important again that everywhere Islam goes regardless of the people group the
goes regardless of the people group the IQ goes down because of this. Let us
IQ goes down because of this. Let us also point out that that's not racial.
also point out that that's not racial. That's every group. Every group that
That's every group. Every group that that goes into uh anything to do with
that goes into uh anything to do with Islam, you end up with the IQ
Islam, you end up with the IQ collectively lowering due to inbreeding.
collectively lowering due to inbreeding. In order to oppose these very same
In order to oppose these very same technologies that he's proposing,
technologies that he's proposing, transhumanism, things like that, you
transhumanism, things like that, you have to be able to make structured
have to be able to make structured arguments, have reason, you have to be
arguments, have reason, you have to be able to actually engage with these
able to actually engage with these people. And if you can't do that, if
people. And if you can't do that, if it's the case that they have such a
it's the case that they have such a technocracy full of phaser guns, you got
technocracy full of phaser guns, you got no [ __ ] chance anyway. You have to at
no [ __ ] chance anyway. You have to at least have a high enough IQ to protect
least have a high enough IQ to protect your people group from the very people
your people group from the very people you are claiming right now have a
you are claiming right now have a technological edge, which is Star Trek
technological edge, which is Star Trek compared to the Apollo 13. So if that's
compared to the Apollo 13. So if that's the case, he still hasn't told you how
the case, he still hasn't told you how having a low IQ is actually going to de
having a low IQ is actually going to de demonstrably help their people group at
demonstrably help their people group at all oppose these types of technologies
all oppose these types of technologies when the very secularists they claim are
when the very secularists they claim are just gaining an IQ, gaining an IQ
just gaining an IQ, gaining an IQ because us dumb Christians, we just
because us dumb Christians, we just can't help it. We become secularists the
can't help it. We become secularists the second we get too smart, right? That's a
second we get too smart, right? That's a big problem for them. again they would
big problem for them. again they would still need to value IQ being raised just
still need to value IQ being raised just enough to protect their people group
enough to protect their people group even if it was the case that Christians
even if it was the case that Christians became secularists even if that was the
became secularists even if that was the case so always his argument goes back to
case so always his argument goes back to low IQ equals benevolency of other
low IQ equals benevolency of other people group because you can't defend
people group because you can't defend your people groups you can't defend your
your people groups you can't defend your peoples you can't do it we have an ocean
peoples you can't do it we have an ocean between us and only one of us is capable
between us and only one of us is capable of attacking the other and that's
of attacking the other and that's because of the massive distinction in
because of the massive distinction in technological prowess and organization
technological prowess and organization ational skills which you're going to
ational skills which you're going to find with intelligence and it's not a
find with intelligence and it's not a thing which is valued by Islam by his
thing which is valued by Islam by his own admission. How could we not be have
own admission. How could we not be have better societies based on that? How
better societies based on that? How >> switch it over
>> switch it over again the benevolence argument. The only
again the benevolence argument. The only reason that you Andrew are able to have
reason that you Andrew are able to have a platform on YouTube is that the
a platform on YouTube is that the benevolence of a bunch of atheist uh
benevolence of a bunch of atheist uh god-hating secularists. That's the only
god-hating secularists. That's the only reason you have a platform. They could
reason you have a platform. They could ban you tomorrow. They say, "Yeah, this
ban you tomorrow. They say, "Yeah, this guy is flying too close to the sun. He's
guy is flying too close to the sun. He's a little bit too hateful." And they ban
a little bit too hateful." And they ban you. Your entire ministry, your entire
you. Your entire ministry, your entire entire outreach is based on the
entire outreach is based on the benevolence of these god-hating
benevolence of these god-hating atheists. People like Elon Musk, people
atheists. People like Elon Musk, people like Peter Teal. This is a problem for
like Peter Teal. This is a problem for everyone who believes in God, not just
everyone who believes in God, not just Muslims. And I want everyone to
Muslims. And I want everyone to recognize this fact. If IQ is the end
recognize this fact. If IQ is the end all beall, the way to maximize IQ is
all beall, the way to maximize IQ is transhumanism. It's to actually
transhumanism. It's to actually genetically engineer human beings to
genetically engineer human beings to have higher IQ because IQ has a genetic
have higher IQ because IQ has a genetic basis. Right? So the number one way to
basis. Right? So the number one way to raise IQ is through genetic engineering,
raise IQ is through genetic engineering, transhumanism. tomorrow if Peter Teal
transhumanism. tomorrow if Peter Teal and Elon Musk and the people who are
and Elon Musk and the people who are controlling Christian countries and the
controlling Christian countries and the and the globe really if they say that
and the globe really if they say that hey we're going to eliminate
hey we're going to eliminate Christianity because actually it leads
Christianity because actually it leads to lower IQ and we have to adopt atheism
to lower IQ and we have to adopt atheism and they mandate that and anyone who
and they mandate that and anyone who says that they believe in God or believe
says that they believe in God or believe in Jesus is actually a radical terrorist
in Jesus is actually a radical terrorist who's spreading hate and the Bible is
who's spreading hate and the Bible is full of hate and we have to ban this in
full of hate and we have to ban this in order to reach our utopia. Okay, that's
order to reach our utopia. Okay, that's going to happen at the hands of
going to happen at the hands of atheists. Christians are also at the
atheists. Christians are also at the mercy of the same kind of IQ fetishists
mercy of the same kind of IQ fetishists who want to transform the human race.
who want to transform the human race. Wake up, Andrew. Wake up. Stop this
Wake up, Andrew. Wake up. Stop this stupid argument.
stupid argument. >> If I if I ask you one question, I'll
>> If I if I ask you one question, I'll yield my time to you and you can ask me
yield my time to you and you can ask me one. Are you willing to answer it? How
one. Are you willing to answer it? How is it, Daniel, and I'll yield my time to
is it, Daniel, and I'll yield my time to you, that even if it's true that right
you, that even if it's true that right now YouTube and these oligarchs can
now YouTube and these oligarchs can deplatform me tomorrow, and that is
deplatform me tomorrow, and that is true, that me having a lower IQ is going
true, that me having a lower IQ is going to be somehow help me in that situation.
to be somehow help me in that situation. That's my question. How is it that
That's my question. How is it that having lower collective IQs would help
having lower collective IQs would help us against transhumanist, Daniel?
us against transhumanist, Daniel? So, the answer to my question has been
So, the answer to my question has been this whole time that there are other
this whole time that there are other values. So, yeah, I might be stupid. I
values. So, yeah, I might be stupid. I might be lower IQ than someone else but
might be lower IQ than someone else but I enjoy my life in other ways. I find
I enjoy my life in other ways. I find value in just in that is the answer to
value in just in that is the answer to your question to uh worshiping God going
your question to uh worshiping God going and spending time with my family having
and spending time with my family having a wife who loves me and I don't have to
a wife who loves me and I don't have to worry about her cheating on me or be
worry about her cheating on me or be having this long history at college or
having this long history at college or whatever. Having children that actually
whatever. Having children that actually respect me and who will take care of me
respect me and who will take care of me in my old age.
in my old age. >> How does a high IQ preclude you from
>> How does a high IQ preclude you from that? because it leads to atheism.
that? because it leads to atheism. >> No. So see what I'm related with
>> No. So see what I'm related with atheism. So here let me show you the
atheism. So here let me show you the circle. Hang on. Let me just show you
circle. Hang on. Let me just show you the circle of our argument.
the circle of our argument. >> I'm making independent argument.
>> I'm making independent argument. >> Yeah. I know. But let me show you the
>> Yeah. I know. But let me show you the circle. These
circle. These >> values are important.
>> values are important. >> Can I show you the circularity here? So
>> Can I show you the circularity here? So your circularity of your argument is
your circularity of your argument is like this.
like this. >> Having a a lower IQ for me somehow means
>> Having a a lower IQ for me somehow means what? That I'm going to suddenly have
what? That I'm going to suddenly have better ethics.
better ethics. >> I'm going to suddenly be a better
>> I'm going to suddenly be a better person. I'm going to suddenly be more
person. I'm going to suddenly be more benevolent. You haven't Hang on. Hang
benevolent. You haven't Hang on. Hang on. you haven't demonstrated that that's
on. you haven't demonstrated that that's the case. And by the way, I would argue
the case. And by the way, I would argue in fact Christian ethics are so
in fact Christian ethics are so overwhelmingly good that secularists who
overwhelmingly good that secularists who have no ethical system borrow ours. And
have no ethical system borrow ours. And so the thing is is like look uh
so the thing is is like look uh ultimately you haven't made an argument
ultimately you haven't made an argument the circularity of your argument is just
the circularity of your argument is just this. Look, you need to have a lower IQ.
this. Look, you need to have a lower IQ. Well, how does that help our people
Well, how does that help our people group defend itself? We if we do well it
group defend itself? We if we do well it doesn't, but there's other values more
doesn't, but there's other values more important. Okay. Does a higher IQ
important. Okay. Does a higher IQ preclude you from that? Answer, no. No.
preclude you from that? Answer, no. No. So, that's the problem with the
So, that's the problem with the circularity, dude, that I'd actually
circularity, dude, that I'd actually like an answer to. And then to be fair,
like an answer to. And then to be fair, because this wasn't a back and forth,
because this wasn't a back and forth, I'm willing to answer yours directly,
I'm willing to answer yours directly, too.
too. Well, excuse me. Sorry. Um, can I get
Well, excuse me. Sorry. Um, can I get water, James? Actually, I can't really.
water, James? Actually, I can't really. My throat is pretty dry here. Um, so the
My throat is pretty dry here. Um, so the there is like a negative correlation
there is like a negative correlation between IQ and religiosity. there is a
between IQ and religiosity. there is a negative correlation with IQ because as
negative correlation with IQ because as you get higher IQ this, you know, you
you get higher IQ this, you know, you can go read Jo um Jonathan Height for
can go read Jo um Jonathan Height for example, you can read Joseph Heinrich
example, you can read Joseph Heinrich for example and in their books they
for example and in their books they point to how higher IQ is correlated
point to how higher IQ is correlated with more liberalization, more
with more liberalization, more secularization, more atheism, more you
secularization, more atheism, more you know freedom for all which causes the
know freedom for all which causes the kind of degeneracy that you and I speak
kind of degeneracy that you and I speak out against. So there is actually a bad
out against. So there is actually a bad consequence to a population with higher
consequence to a population with higher IQ because you'll get more atheism. So
IQ because you'll get more atheism. So that's that's that's one problem that
that's that's that's one problem that you can point out. And I'm just saying
you can point out. And I'm just saying that look, let's not be IQ fetishists.
that look, let's not be IQ fetishists. Even if you you think cousin marriage is
Even if you you think cousin marriage is degenerate, disgusting. Okay, fine. But
degenerate, disgusting. Okay, fine. But still, higher IQ does not correlate with
still, higher IQ does not correlate with better societies. It's leading to a
better societies. It's leading to a problem that is unsolvable. Okay, this
problem that is unsolvable. Okay, this is a problem of higher and higher
is a problem of higher and higher technologies that are going that's going
technologies that are going that's going to cause us to uh live in a dystopia, a
to cause us to uh live in a dystopia, a transhumanist dystopia. That is a
transhumanist dystopia. That is a problem for everyone. It's not like an
problem for everyone. It's not like an own against the Muslims. It's an own
own against the Muslims. It's an own against the human race. Peter Teal with
against the human race. Peter Teal with his ugly smug face is laughing at us, at
his ugly smug face is laughing at us, at Christians, at Muslims. They're laughing
Christians, at Muslims. They're laughing because they have this demonic uh
because they have this demonic uh antichrist future that they're planning
antichrist future that they're planning for us and it is based on technology.
for us and it is based on technology. Yeah, but this doesn't really respond
Yeah, but this doesn't really respond again to the argument the the question
again to the argument the the question here when you say that athe is true that
here when you say that athe is true that IQ can have correlates to atheism. But
IQ can have correlates to atheism. But we were talking about societies
we were talking about societies reverting to the IQ mean the mean the
reverting to the IQ mean the mean the mean IQ of the societies you produce sir
mean IQ of the societies you produce sir are between one to two standard
are between one to two standard deviations lower than the average
deviations lower than the average Christian nation. the mean. Now, there
Christian nation. the mean. Now, there is no coralate that Daniel will be able
is no coralate that Daniel will be able to show you that having average IQ's
to show you that having average IQ's leads to secularism. It doesn't. It
leads to secularism. It doesn't. It doesn't. Show me the coralate if that's
doesn't. Show me the coralate if that's the case. You can't. And the average
the case. You can't. And the average IQ's in these nations, which is just
IQ's in these nations, which is just between 100 to 115 professionals, middle
between 100 to 115 professionals, middle management, it doesn't preclude them at
management, it doesn't preclude them at all or doesn't force them to secularism
all or doesn't force them to secularism at all. We're talking about the means of
at all. We're talking about the means of society. The mean IQ of of two standard
society. The mean IQ of of two standard deviations lower in many cases precludes
deviations lower in many cases precludes you from having any sort of civilization
you from having any sort of civilization really. It really does. Just basic
really. It really does. Just basic infrastructure and things like this. So
infrastructure and things like this. So Daniel would need to show you how having
Daniel would need to show you how having a 100 IQ, an average IQ is going to lead
a 100 IQ, an average IQ is going to lead everybody to secularism because
everybody to secularism because societies revert to the mean. It
societies revert to the mean. It doesn't. It doesn't lead to secularism.
doesn't. It doesn't lead to secularism. It's a lie. You have to have these
It's a lie. You have to have these higher IQs, much higher, otherwise
higher IQs, much higher, otherwise demonstrated. And if he can, even let's
demonstrated. And if he can, even let's just say he could somehow then his
just say he could somehow then his prescription is actually just that he
prescription is actually just that he wants to keep the world at 70 IQ. That's
wants to keep the world at 70 IQ. That's crazy. There is nothing which precludes
crazy. There is nothing which precludes Christian ethics uh from from people
Christian ethics uh from from people groups that have average IQs or even
groups that have average IQs or even above average IQs. And there's plenty of
above average IQs. And there's plenty of smart people, by the way, who are
smart people, by the way, who are Christians. Now, to kind of hone in on
Christians. Now, to kind of hone in on that argument, just remember this.
that argument, just remember this. secularists, these really high IQ
secularists, these really high IQ secularists, they've never been able to
secularists, they've never been able to find a system of ethics ever that's
find a system of ethics ever that's better than Christianity, which is why
better than Christianity, which is why they adopt it. So, just pointing that
they adopt it. So, just pointing that out.
out. >> We're going to give Daniel the last 90
>> We're going to give Daniel the last 90 second response, then we're going to
second response, then we're going to jump into the Q&A. The floor is yours,
jump into the Q&A. The floor is yours, Daniel.
Daniel. >> Yeah. So, the 100 average IQ, that's in
>> Yeah. So, the 100 average IQ, that's in the modern period after secularization
the modern period after secularization has taken place. Uh there's a Flynn
has taken place. Uh there's a Flynn effect. If you look at the IQ in the
effect. If you look at the IQ in the world, the average was below 100. The
world, the average was below 100. The average IQ globally was around 80. Uh in
average IQ globally was around 80. Uh in Christian societies, in Muslim
Christian societies, in Muslim societies, that was the global average.
societies, that was the global average. Secularization is through like secular
Secularization is through like secular education and the Flynn effect. This is
education and the Flynn effect. This is what has increased IQ to so that the
what has increased IQ to so that the average is now at 100. So again like if
average is now at 100. So again like if you need a 100 IQ average to be
you need a 100 IQ average to be successful then you're basically saying
successful then you're basically saying all of Christendom uh has been a failure
all of Christendom uh has been a failure like somehow they are able to have an
like somehow they are able to have an empire like a Christian empire
empire like a Christian empire throughout history despite being you
throughout history despite being you know two standard deviations lower in IQ
know two standard deviations lower in IQ than current day averages. Your argument
than current day averages. Your argument is really self-defeating in so so many
is really self-defeating in so so many ways. Um and again like I have to say
ways. Um and again like I have to say that you know I think this is a problem
that you know I think this is a problem that is a the problem of transhumanism
that is a the problem of transhumanism is affecting the entire world Muslims
is affecting the entire world Muslims and Christians and we really have to
and Christians and we really have to come up with a solution. We can't just
come up with a solution. We can't just keep praising this idea of technology
keep praising this idea of technology and IQ because that plays into the hands
and IQ because that plays into the hands of the people that want to destroy the
of the people that want to destroy the human race. They want to literally usher
human race. They want to literally usher in the antichrist. So, let's try to take
in the antichrist. So, let's try to take the bigger picture in mind. Um, rather
the bigger picture in mind. Um, rather than trying to own us, own each other
than trying to own us, own each other with arguments that are self-defeating.
with arguments that are self-defeating. We're going to jump into the Q&A. Folks,
We're going to jump into the Q&A. Folks, if you have a question, line up in the
if you have a question, line up in the middle aisle and we'll get to your
middle aisle and we'll get to your question in just a moment.
question in just a moment. And then Sean, uh, if you can turn me
And then Sean, uh, if you can turn me up. Thanks so much, Sean.
up. Thanks so much, Sean. Sean.
All right. Thank you very much. I'm just giving you I'm just teasing Sean. Sean's
giving you I'm just teasing Sean. Sean's a man. Um yeah, come on up here. And
a man. Um yeah, come on up here. And then I do want to remind you folks is
then I do want to remind you folks is that we'd like to keep the questions on
that we'd like to keep the questions on the topic. So we don't want questions
the topic. So we don't want questions that are going to, you know, to be
that are going to, you know, to be personal attacks or even things that are
personal attacks or even things that are off topic trying to just get under
off topic trying to just get under people's skin. The debaters work their
people's skin. The debaters work their asses off. We really do appreciate them.
asses off. We really do appreciate them. So want to give them the proper respect.
So want to give them the proper respect. We'll have the first question be from
We'll have the first question be from Rachel Wilson.
Rachel Wilson. Wait, one one last thing. Oh, is that
Wait, one one last thing. Oh, is that none of this I have two questions
none of this I have two questions business. We only do one question at a
business. We only do one question at a time and I got to hold it just to be
time and I got to hold it just to be sure nobody tries any filibustering.
sure nobody tries any filibustering. >> All right. So, my question for Daniel is
>> All right. So, my question for Daniel is I don't know if you're aware, you kind
I don't know if you're aware, you kind of gave the game away where you kind of
of gave the game away where you kind of stated that the Muslim plan is to
stated that the Muslim plan is to infiltrate Western uh countries and kind
infiltrate Western uh countries and kind of outbreed us, right? If you can't beat
of outbreed us, right? If you can't beat them, outre them. But I don't know if
them, outre them. But I don't know if you're aware of the fact that when
you're aware of the fact that when Muslims immigrate to Western nations,
Muslims immigrate to Western nations, they still marry their cousins at about
they still marry their cousins at about the same rate, but within one to two
the same rate, but within one to two generations, their birth rate is just
generations, their birth rate is just about on par with all of us in the West.
about on par with all of us in the West. So, how's that going to turn out for you
So, how's that going to turn out for you guys, do you think?
guys, do you think? >> I think you're referring to like another
>> I think you're referring to like another debate.
debate. It's another debate that I had with a
It's another debate that I had with a white nationalist. And the white
white nationalist. And the white nationalist was kind of making this
nationalist was kind of making this might makes right argument as well that
might makes right argument as well that the white nations are going to dominate
the white nations are going to dominate the Muslim nations. And I said look if
the Muslim nations. And I said look if might makes right then you don't have
might makes right then you don't have really a kind of moral argument against
really a kind of moral argument against immigration the Muslims who are
immigration the Muslims who are immigrating can also make a might makes
immigrating can also make a might makes right that okay fine if you are going to
right that okay fine if you are going to use all your weapons against us Muslims
use all your weapons against us Muslims well we're going to use birth rates
well we're going to use birth rates against you. So it was really a response
against you. So it was really a response like I don't want to have war with the
like I don't want to have war with the world. I don't want to have infiltration
world. I don't want to have infiltration to take but if that if that's the
to take but if that if that's the standard that we're going to have for
standard that we're going to have for everyone like okay whoever's the
everyone like okay whoever's the strongest if you're not strong enough
strongest if you're not strong enough we're going to genocide you okay if
we're going to genocide you okay if that's the standard that we're operating
that's the standard that we're operating under then Muslims are going to have to
under then Muslims are going to have to try to survive like any other peoples
try to survive like any other peoples would
would so my question is actually for Andrew
so my question is actually for Andrew but I would like to hear your response
but I would like to hear your response as well Daniel I'm sure you're familiar
as well Daniel I'm sure you're familiar but we have this tradition in the west
but we have this tradition in the west where the man typically goes to the
where the man typically goes to the father and asks for the daughter's hand
father and asks for the daughter's hand in marriage. If your nephew came up to
in marriage. If your nephew came up to you asking this, would you permit it?
you asking this, would you permit it? >> No.
>> No. >> Daniel, sorry, I didn't understand your
>> Daniel, sorry, I didn't understand your nephew. Can you repeat that?
nephew. Can you repeat that? >> So, we have this tradition in the West
>> So, we have this tradition in the West where the man who wants to marry a lady
where the man who wants to marry a lady goes to the father asking for the
goes to the father asking for the daughter's hand in marriage. So, if your
daughter's hand in marriage. So, if your nephew came to you with this request,
nephew came to you with this request, would you permit it?
would you permit it? >> Uh, yeah, I'd consider it. Yeah,
>> Uh, yeah, I'd consider it. Yeah, >> I consider depending on qualities I'd
>> I consider depending on qualities I'd have. Yeah.
I mean this is something Jesus if Jesus was also like the the church fathers
was also like the the church fathers living um you know early centuries.
living um you know early centuries. >> Folks I do want to ask just just so the
>> Folks I do want to ask just just so the other people that are listening to the
other people that are listening to the speaker can hear. I just want to ask if
speaker can hear. I just want to ask if you could keep the conversations down to
you could keep the conversations down to a minimum.
a minimum. >> Yeah. So as I was saying like um in the
>> Yeah. So as I was saying like um in the early periods of Christianity um if some
early periods of Christianity um if some Christian father was asked can I marry
Christian father was asked can I marry um your daughter? a nephew comes and
um your daughter? a nephew comes and asks, he would also say yes. It was only
asks, he would also say yes. It was only later in Christian history that that was
later in Christian history that that was considered to be incest and it was
considered to be incest and it was outlawed. And actually what um the
outlawed. And actually what um the outlaw of cousin marriage didn't extend
outlaw of cousin marriage didn't extend just to first cousins. Like I don't know
just to first cousins. Like I don't know if you realize this, it extended to
if you realize this, it extended to second, third, fourth, all the way to
second, third, fourth, all the way to seventh cousin. That's how much the
seventh cousin. That's how much the church for some reason decided and
church for some reason decided and decreed that we don't want any kind of
decreed that we don't want any kind of cousin marriage. But that had a big
cousin marriage. But that had a big impact on the size of like the average
impact on the size of like the average family size. is it had a big impact on
family size. is it had a big impact on religiosity and all kinds of other
religiosity and all kinds of other factors. I highly recommend you read the
factors. I highly recommend you read the book of Joseph Heinrich um who has a
book of Joseph Heinrich um who has a thick volume talking about this. He
thick volume talking about this. He actually makes an argument that cousin
actually makes an argument that cousin marriage is associated with the rise
marriage is associated with the rise like banning cousin marriage is
like banning cousin marriage is associated with the rise of technology
associated with the rise of technology and IQ. So it's right along right up
and IQ. So it's right along right up Andrew's alley. But this is not
Andrew's alley. But this is not necessarily a good thing for the reasons
necessarily a good thing for the reasons I explained.
I explained. >> Ready for you?
>> Ready for you? >> Uh this one's for Daniel. Um we've
>> Uh this one's for Daniel. Um we've Andrew has established that at the
Andrew has established that at the beginning of the debate the causitive
beginning of the debate the causitive chain to lower IQ is inbreeding. Now the
chain to lower IQ is inbreeding. Now the inductive case is going to be Islam both
inductive case is going to be Islam both uh allows and often promotes inbreeding
uh allows and often promotes inbreeding that's causing lower IQ. What in
that's causing lower IQ. What in Christianity is causing them to be a
Christianity is causing them to be a lower IQ so that we can compare these
lower IQ so that we can compare these two?
two? >> Well, one example that I gave in the
>> Well, one example that I gave in the debate is uh interracial marriage. So
debate is uh interracial marriage. So interracial marriage can also contribute
interracial marriage can also contribute to lower IQ. If anything that lowers IQ
to lower IQ. If anything that lowers IQ is something that's bad, then Christians
is something that's bad, then Christians and Andrew should be against interracial
and Andrew should be against interracial marriage as well. That's one example. He
marriage as well. That's one example. He didn't really respond to that, but um
didn't really respond to that, but um that's another thing highly associated
that's another thing highly associated with um lower IQ. Also, education,
with um lower IQ. Also, education, secular education is associated with
secular education is associated with higher IQ. Religious e education is
higher IQ. Religious e education is correlated with lower IQ. So you'd of
correlated with lower IQ. So you'd of also have to insist that people go to
also have to insist that people go to secular education instead of religious
secular education instead of religious education if your only priority or your
education if your only priority or your main priority was increasing the IQ
main priority was increasing the IQ within society.
within society. >> Well, that's I mean but that's not the
>> Well, that's I mean but that's not the main priority, right? The the idea is
main priority, right? The the idea is that
that >> yeah the idea is not that this is the
>> yeah the idea is not that this is the main priority. The idea instead is which
main priority. The idea instead is which one makes for better societies and we
one makes for better societies and we can point to a coralate for why their
can point to a coralate for why their societies are not better. He keeps on
societies are not better. He keeps on straw manning the position and saying
straw manning the position and saying this is your main this is the only thing
this is your main this is the only thing you care about. It's not. It's not.
you care about. It's not. It's not. >> Um my uh question is for you Daniel. Um
>> Um my uh question is for you Daniel. Um using and maintaining AI requires a
using and maintaining AI requires a massive energy source and infrastructure
massive energy source and infrastructure in order to be used. If Muslims plan to
in order to be used. If Muslims plan to use AI to make up for your [ __ ]
use AI to make up for your [ __ ] nations, how do you plan to implement
nations, how do you plan to implement the infrastructure and build the
the infrastructure and build the necessary power to use AI when you can't
necessary power to use AI when you can't even build your own technology? You buy
even build your own technology? You buy it from middle management nations. And
it from middle management nations. And by middle management nations and in this
by middle management nations and in this case I um you might not understand I
case I um you might not understand I mean high IQ nations
mean high IQ nations >> here. Let me let me uh paint you a
>> here. Let me let me uh paint you a picture there. Um so you have your high
picture there. Um so you have your high IQ nations and they have the AI and they
IQ nations and they have the AI and they have their power sources and you have
have their power sources and you have the neural link and everyone is plugged
the neural link and everyone is plugged into the cloud and you're like plugged
into the cloud and you're like plugged into the masturbation machine with your
into the masturbation machine with your non-stop virtual AI porn that you're
non-stop virtual AI porn that you're addicted to and that dopamine is
addicted to and that dopamine is surging. You're in a constant state of
surging. You're in a constant state of euphoria. And then guess what? The
euphoria. And then guess what? The Muslims, the low IQ idiot Muslims that
Muslims, the low IQ idiot Muslims that have been living in the desert with
have been living in the desert with their donkeys. They're going to come and
their donkeys. They're going to come and they're going to slaughter all of these
they're going to slaughter all of these people hooked up to the masturbation
people hooked up to the masturbation machine. They won't even be able to
machine. They won't even be able to stand on their two legs because their
stand on their two legs because their legs have atrophied to such an extent
legs have atrophied to such an extent that they can't even walk. That's the
that they can't even walk. That's the future of the West. That's the future of
future of the West. That's the future of the high IQ. the horde, the biomass of
the high IQ. the horde, the biomass of Muslims are going to come with their
Muslims are going to come with their swords because they don't have the high
swords because they don't have the high IQ necessary to actually develop guns
IQ necessary to actually develop guns and manufacture them on mass. They're
and manufacture them on mass. They're going to come and slaughter all of the
going to come and slaughter all of the high IQ geniuses. That's a kind of
high IQ geniuses. That's a kind of future, right? Right.
future, right? Right. >> There's I think there's one one clarifi
>> There's I think there's one one clarifi one clarification
one clarification >> clarification. So, I wasn't talking
>> clarification. So, I wasn't talking about like how we get to you know where
about like how we get to you know where AI is or what you're planning to do with
AI is or what you're planning to do with it. My you said you were going to
it. My you said you were going to implement AI to combat. So how are you
implement AI to combat. So how are you going to utilize or build these
going to utilize or build these infrastructures for the AI? That was my
infrastructures for the AI? That was my question. If you don't know how to
question. If you don't know how to >> No, no, the point was that um you can
>> No, no, the point was that um you can have nations that give access to Muslims
have nations that give access to Muslims that are not aligned with the west. So
that are not aligned with the west. So China for example has its own IQ or AI
China for example has its own IQ or AI facilities that they can provide and
facilities that they can provide and they as a way to battle western
they as a way to battle western hijgemony. And you have contracts that
hijgemony. And you have contracts that exist between China and these Muslim
exist between China and these Muslim countries for energy. like where is
countries for energy. like where is China getting its energy? It's not
China getting its energy? It's not mainly coming from mainland China.
mainly coming from mainland China. They're getting it from the Middle East
They're getting it from the Middle East from Muslim countries. Okay. So, there
from Muslim countries. Okay. So, there is a quid proquo economic agreement to
is a quid proquo economic agreement to uh give access to those technologies to
uh give access to those technologies to Muslim nations.
>> Hi. Uh so, unfortunately for you, I am the Andrew Wilson of AI debates and here
the Andrew Wilson of AI debates and here I am before you asking you this very
I am before you asking you this very simple question. Since you like AI and
simple question. Since you like AI and you know about Peter Teal and Elon Musk
you know about Peter Teal and Elon Musk and your link, you surely know that AI
and your link, you surely know that AI is a preerequisite to transhumanism. So
is a preerequisite to transhumanism. So here you are promoting AI as an IQ
here you are promoting AI as an IQ equalizer, which by the way, looking at
equalizer, which by the way, looking at the charts of IQ that uh AI has as it
the charts of IQ that uh AI has as it has been tested in the last 20 years has
has been tested in the last 20 years has outperformed Muslim countries for the
outperformed Muslim countries for the last 1,400 years. Carrying on, as AI
last 1,400 years. Carrying on, as AI gets better, there's going to come a
gets better, there's going to come a point where, say, AI decides that your
point where, say, AI decides that your countries don't need to exist anymore.
countries don't need to exist anymore. It can take over your energy. Can you
It can take over your energy. Can you give me the list of names of the donkeys
give me the list of names of the donkeys you would use to fight this
you would use to fight this transhumanist AI?
transhumanist AI? >> Look at this guy. Like, did people see
>> Look at this guy. Like, did people see you?
All of these disgenic people come to the debates, James, and the guy is like not
debates, James, and the guy is like not even a 100 pounds and he's talking big
even a 100 pounds and he's talking big as if like this is some like great point
as if like this is some like great point that he's made great point that he's
that he's made great point that he's made about AI. AI is going to wipe you
made about AI. AI is going to wipe you out. The entire the entire point.
out. The entire the entire point. >> Hold on one second. I know that you're
>> Hold on one second. I know that you're upset.
upset. >> We do have to We have to Hold on one
>> We do have to We have to Hold on one second. We We just All right. The The
second. We We just All right. The The questioner jabbed, so Daniel's going to
questioner jabbed, so Daniel's going to jab a little back. We got to give them a
jab a little back. We got to give them a chance to speak though. We have to
chance to speak though. We have to handle it. James, they can't handle me
handle it. James, they can't handle me to mock them. Okay. So,
to mock them. Okay. So, >> that again, as I mentioned, the kind of
>> that again, as I mentioned, the kind of technology that's being developed is
technology that's being developed is going to destroy all of humanity,
going to destroy all of humanity, not just Muslims. I know you have a
not just Muslims. I know you have a fetish for seeing brown people being
fetish for seeing brown people being exterminated. Maybe. I don't know. You
exterminated. Maybe. I don't know. You looked like you were pretty excited
looked like you were pretty excited there about about other people being
there about about other people being exterminated. But the wider point, the
exterminated. But the wider point, the wider point was that that technology is
wider point was that that technology is al also going to come for you. Maybe not
al also going to come for you. Maybe not you, maybe you're in bed with the pe the
you, maybe you're in bed with the pe the Peter Teals of the world, but for the
Peter Teals of the world, but for the rest of normal people around us, they
rest of normal people around us, they hate people like you. They view you as
hate people like you. They view you as they view you as these transhumanists
they view you as these transhumanists who only care about progress at the cost
who only care about progress at the cost of human life. So, you're actually hated
of human life. So, you're actually hated by the vast majority of human beings in
by the vast majority of human beings in the world, including Christians. we have
the world, including Christians. we have to uh wrap up due to we have a we have
to uh wrap up due to we have a we have had a fantastic debate. So first before
had a fantastic debate. So first before I go on with any housekeeping stuff I
I go on with any housekeeping stuff I want to say please give me uh please
want to say please give me uh please join me in giving a round of applause
join me in giving a round of applause for our speakers.
With that, I want to say thank you very much folks for being here with us
much folks for being here with us tonight. If you have any questions,
tonight. If you have any questions, please ask Bob or I. We look forward to
please ask Bob or I. We look forward to seeing you tomorrow. Thanks so much and
seeing you tomorrow. Thanks so much and have a great rest of your night.
