Sometimes when we're bored we like to write about the people who have amused us for some reason or other. Over the years we've published articles on the blog we've had one individual who, as a frequent reader, has often tried to rhetorically cross swords with us:
This wide-eyed waif is a young Tomasz Winnicki pictured at a time when he was innocent, hopeful, and had a full head of hair. Eventually Tommy would turn into this:
The years have not been very kind to Tom. Like the boy he was in the first photograph, this nearly 40 year old man-child also still live with his mother and still has difficulty cleaning his bedroom.
Does the term "arrested development" have any meaning, Tommy?
Our long time readers are by this point aware of Tommy and his unjustifiably inflated ego. In short, Winnicki believes himself to be a particularly brilliant chap and that that his ideological foes cower in the face of an obvious intellectual giant. Tommy certainly isn't shy about sharing with others how clever he believes he is:
The above post is based on Winnicki's perception of a discussion found here on the "London Free Press." In the echo chamber that is VNN, there are those who will likely believe that he is "schooling" the folks he describes as anti-racists. Then again, he also thought this was a legitimate argument concerning the recent national elections in Sweden:
We often like to poke Winnicki because.... well.... it's lots of fun. We also know that challenging his intelligence will result in a temper tantrum and Tommy did not fail to disappoint us:
Oh, Tommy, you are such a sweet talker!
In addition to the racism and the misogyny found in his missive, Tommy can't help but contradict himself in an effort to save face. On the one hand he excuses himself for using an example that made him look foolish and, dare we suggest pretty stupid, but then further excuses himself by claiming he was right after all since the women we will loosely call actresses look white and, thus, look Swedish enough for him.
We wonder if such an argument would work if one of the women in the beer commercial was Jewish?
But really Tommy! Any 10 year old (heck, 7 year old) could figure out how to use a search engine to find this information, whether or not that kid is literate in pop culture trivia. By they way, this isn't exactly the first time he has used a rather unfortunate example that undermined his argument.
His use of Chris Langan is also hypocritical and self-serving. On the one hand Winnicki uses IQ as a measure of an individual's worth. On the other hand, when Winnicki is given an example of a woman with a high IQ....
.... he dismisses IQ as basically irrelevant:
Inventive intelligence? You mean like these young women, Tommy?
Of course not. Despite these particular young women already accomplishing more before they turned 18 than Tomasz Winnicki has achieved in his entire life, this is what Winnicki thinks of women such as these:
That's right ladies. He's single. Imagine, all this could be yours, though Max Hynes of the Southern Ontario "Skinheads" doesn't seem to think Winnicki is much of a catch:
%2Bon%2BWinnicki%2B-%2BDec%2B7%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B1.jpg)
If it's on VNN where he boasts about how easily he can best those he characterizes as anti-racists in a battle of wits, it's on the websites of "The London Free Press," "Huffington Post," and other sites where he attempts to engage in his verbal sparing. If one reads his comments, one quickly learns he has a few go to lines he uses ad nauseam. When discussing what he perceives as an intellectual gap between white men other groups (women and non-white peoples) he often suggests the design of certain cars and jets by European men as proof of the intellectual superiority of white men (it also might also be another indication of arrested development, as boys really do like their toys). Often he would include a phrase which looks to have been borrowed from Alex Linder, founder of VNN: "civilization is a function of DNA." This suggests that white male intellectual superiority Winnicki assumes exists is genetic and immutable.
We've noticed that he has started to use another phrase in his online screeds.
An article in "The Atlantic" regarding James Watson's efforts to sell his Nobel Prize caught Winnicki's attention leading him to engage in one of the numerous logical fallacies he is prone to; argumentum ab auctoritate.
Watson, the co-discoverer of DNA along with Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin (though Franklin's critical work was never sufficiently acknowledged by Watson, Crick, or the Nobel committee), had become a bit of a pariah for trying to link intelligence to race. The article discusses the long history of Watson's scientific hubris and the fact that the actual science of genetics disproved Watson who himself never offered any actual proof for his claim. However, Watson was awarded a Nobel Prize and his statement conforms to Winnicki's belief, so Tommy chimed in to defend the faded scientist. Among his posts in the article, this one stood out to us:
Winnicki has started using the line that one must, "observe patterns and draw correct conclusions to predict future patterns" in his efforts to prove the superiority of white men. In short, the current advantages the West enjoy now is evidence of the genetic advantages European men have over all other ethnic groups and that given this current "pattern" the conclusion he draws it that racial genetic advantage will continue into the future. He has also added on other occasions that Western science should not be shared with the more swarthy people of the planet, not because he feels it wrong to interfere in the affairs of other cultures, but because these other peoples do no deserve to enjoy the benefits of "white science."
What Winnicki ironically doesn't appear to understand, and what other posters on the Watson article attempt futilely to explain to him, is that he is failing his own test.
Numerous other posters noted that much of the knowledge of the West is as a result of building on the knowledge of the past often from non-Western nations. For example, while Newton is presented as proof that white men are intellectually superior, Winnicki dismisses the contribution of Indian mathematicians who's prior knowledge may very well have been the basis for modern mathematics without which Newton could not have made his own contributions. The Greeks certainly recognized the contribution to science made by the earlier, non-white, Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations. The Persians made critically important contributions to science. Chinese science was shared with the West on the Silk Road. The work of Arab astronomer al-Battani was later used by Copernicus, and other Islamic scholars advanced science in ways that the West benefited from directly. African metallurgy was often far more advanced than that found in Europe during the time.
And though Winnicki might dismiss the contributions of earlier, non-white, scientists, we're not sure two of his heroes would be as dismissive:
We also notice that Winnicki fails to look at historical trends sufficiently. If he did so, he would understand that the technological superiority of certain regions wax and wane. When the Sumerian civilization was at it's height, most of Europe was still living life as they had during the Neolithic period. After the collapse of the Greco-Roman world, Islamic culture took up the banner of civilization when divided Europe fell back into barbarism. This waxing and waning of hegemony has gone on through recorded history and there is no reason to believe it might not continue into the future.
In short, if Winnicki believes that a sign of intelligence is the ability to observe patterns and draw correct conclusions to predict future patterns, he might appear moderately more intelligent if he did so himself. We won't hold our collective breathes.
Another example of Winnicki's failure to follow his own dictum is connected to crime. Winnicki often points to Toronto, the largest city in Canada and one of the most ethnically diverse cities on the planet, as evidence that ethnically diverse cities are dystopian hellscapes and that homogeneous societies are less prone to criminal activities. He uses the murder rate as his barometer:
These are relatively recent posts, but they are based on the same assumptions Winnicki has been going on for years about. It's interesting that he has never once to our knowledge backed up any of his claims about diversity contributing to a high crime rate. He simply feels he is correct which is actually pretty ironic since he often accuses those who don't agree with world view as being emotional and not logical.... like him.
Some years ago, we decided to take up the challenge he presented to us. We actually did so in two separate articles:
%2B-%2BNov%2B18%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B1.jpg)
%2B-%2BNov%2B22%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B2.jpg)
This wide-eyed waif is a young Tomasz Winnicki pictured at a time when he was innocent, hopeful, and had a full head of hair. Eventually Tommy would turn into this:
The years have not been very kind to Tom. Like the boy he was in the first photograph, this nearly 40 year old man-child also still live with his mother and still has difficulty cleaning his bedroom.
Does the term "arrested development" have any meaning, Tommy?
Our long time readers are by this point aware of Tommy and his unjustifiably inflated ego. In short, Winnicki believes himself to be a particularly brilliant chap and that that his ideological foes cower in the face of an obvious intellectual giant. Tommy certainly isn't shy about sharing with others how clever he believes he is:
The above post is based on Winnicki's perception of a discussion found here on the "London Free Press." In the echo chamber that is VNN, there are those who will likely believe that he is "schooling" the folks he describes as anti-racists. Then again, he also thought this was a legitimate argument concerning the recent national elections in Sweden:
We often like to poke Winnicki because.... well.... it's lots of fun. We also know that challenging his intelligence will result in a temper tantrum and Tommy did not fail to disappoint us:
Oh, Tommy, you are such a sweet talker!
In addition to the racism and the misogyny found in his missive, Tommy can't help but contradict himself in an effort to save face. On the one hand he excuses himself for using an example that made him look foolish and, dare we suggest pretty stupid, but then further excuses himself by claiming he was right after all since the women we will loosely call actresses look white and, thus, look Swedish enough for him.
We wonder if such an argument would work if one of the women in the beer commercial was Jewish?
But really Tommy! Any 10 year old (heck, 7 year old) could figure out how to use a search engine to find this information, whether or not that kid is literate in pop culture trivia. By they way, this isn't exactly the first time he has used a rather unfortunate example that undermined his argument.
His use of Chris Langan is also hypocritical and self-serving. On the one hand Winnicki uses IQ as a measure of an individual's worth. On the other hand, when Winnicki is given an example of a woman with a high IQ....
.... he dismisses IQ as basically irrelevant:
Inventive intelligence? You mean like these young women, Tommy?
Of course not. Despite these particular young women already accomplishing more before they turned 18 than Tomasz Winnicki has achieved in his entire life, this is what Winnicki thinks of women such as these:
That's right ladies. He's single. Imagine, all this could be yours, though Max Hynes of the Southern Ontario "Skinheads" doesn't seem to think Winnicki is much of a catch:
%2Bon%2BWinnicki%2B-%2BDec%2B7%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B1.jpg){kind=small}
If it's on VNN where he boasts about how easily he can best those he characterizes as anti-racists in a battle of wits, it's on the websites of "The London Free Press," "Huffington Post," and other sites where he attempts to engage in his verbal sparing. If one reads his comments, one quickly learns he has a few go to lines he uses ad nauseam. When discussing what he perceives as an intellectual gap between white men other groups (women and non-white peoples) he often suggests the design of certain cars and jets by European men as proof of the intellectual superiority of white men (it also might also be another indication of arrested development, as boys really do like their toys). Often he would include a phrase which looks to have been borrowed from Alex Linder, founder of VNN: "civilization is a function of DNA." This suggests that white male intellectual superiority Winnicki assumes exists is genetic and immutable.
We've noticed that he has started to use another phrase in his online screeds.
An article in "The Atlantic" regarding James Watson's efforts to sell his Nobel Prize caught Winnicki's attention leading him to engage in one of the numerous logical fallacies he is prone to; argumentum ab auctoritate.
Watson, the co-discoverer of DNA along with Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin (though Franklin's critical work was never sufficiently acknowledged by Watson, Crick, or the Nobel committee), had become a bit of a pariah for trying to link intelligence to race. The article discusses the long history of Watson's scientific hubris and the fact that the actual science of genetics disproved Watson who himself never offered any actual proof for his claim. However, Watson was awarded a Nobel Prize and his statement conforms to Winnicki's belief, so Tommy chimed in to defend the faded scientist. Among his posts in the article, this one stood out to us:
Winnicki has started using the line that one must, "observe patterns and draw correct conclusions to predict future patterns" in his efforts to prove the superiority of white men. In short, the current advantages the West enjoy now is evidence of the genetic advantages European men have over all other ethnic groups and that given this current "pattern" the conclusion he draws it that racial genetic advantage will continue into the future. He has also added on other occasions that Western science should not be shared with the more swarthy people of the planet, not because he feels it wrong to interfere in the affairs of other cultures, but because these other peoples do no deserve to enjoy the benefits of "white science."
What Winnicki ironically doesn't appear to understand, and what other posters on the Watson article attempt futilely to explain to him, is that he is failing his own test.
Numerous other posters noted that much of the knowledge of the West is as a result of building on the knowledge of the past often from non-Western nations. For example, while Newton is presented as proof that white men are intellectually superior, Winnicki dismisses the contribution of Indian mathematicians who's prior knowledge may very well have been the basis for modern mathematics without which Newton could not have made his own contributions. The Greeks certainly recognized the contribution to science made by the earlier, non-white, Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations. The Persians made critically important contributions to science. Chinese science was shared with the West on the Silk Road. The work of Arab astronomer al-Battani was later used by Copernicus, and other Islamic scholars advanced science in ways that the West benefited from directly. African metallurgy was often far more advanced than that found in Europe during the time.
And though Winnicki might dismiss the contributions of earlier, non-white, scientists, we're not sure two of his heroes would be as dismissive:
We also notice that Winnicki fails to look at historical trends sufficiently. If he did so, he would understand that the technological superiority of certain regions wax and wane. When the Sumerian civilization was at it's height, most of Europe was still living life as they had during the Neolithic period. After the collapse of the Greco-Roman world, Islamic culture took up the banner of civilization when divided Europe fell back into barbarism. This waxing and waning of hegemony has gone on through recorded history and there is no reason to believe it might not continue into the future.
In short, if Winnicki believes that a sign of intelligence is the ability to observe patterns and draw correct conclusions to predict future patterns, he might appear moderately more intelligent if he did so himself. We won't hold our collective breathes.
Another example of Winnicki's failure to follow his own dictum is connected to crime. Winnicki often points to Toronto, the largest city in Canada and one of the most ethnically diverse cities on the planet, as evidence that ethnically diverse cities are dystopian hellscapes and that homogeneous societies are less prone to criminal activities. He uses the murder rate as his barometer:
These are relatively recent posts, but they are based on the same assumptions Winnicki has been going on for years about. It's interesting that he has never once to our knowledge backed up any of his claims about diversity contributing to a high crime rate. He simply feels he is correct which is actually pretty ironic since he often accuses those who don't agree with world view as being emotional and not logical.... like him.
Some years ago, we decided to take up the challenge he presented to us. We actually did so in two separate articles:
What happens when Tommy is provided with actual evidence that refutes his claims?
He takes his ball and goes home:
He takes his ball and goes home:
 |
| We're still not Jason, but thanks for playing Tommy. |
Or, in other words....
But as much as we like to poke at Tommy, we did have a moment where we actually began to genuinely pity him.
A short time ago, Linder took VNN off line for a few days as a result of not raising the sufficient cash to keep it going:
%2B-%2BNov%2B18%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B1.jpg)
When it came back online, Tommy was one of the first to comment (though we don't know if he contributed any cash to the effort):
%2B-%2BNov%2B22%2C%2B2014%2B-%2B2.jpg)
That might be one of the most pathetic things we have read in a very long time. Unable to interact with real people, Winnicki really does rely on online engagement for even a taste of human contact. It really puts this in perspective:
You know what dude? We're not sure that you do know how.
Hey, all we're doing is drawing conclusions based on observed patterns.
Hey, all we're doing is drawing conclusions based on observed patterns.
lol what an idiot.I feel bad for Winnicki.
ReplyDelete