He bans people from making unsubstantiated comments on his site yet finds it entirely appropriate to declare in big bold letters, "When it comes to succeeding in life, EQ is as important as IQ". I suppose this is an example of an unsubstantiated claim--but of course we must defer to Mr. Wong's supreme love in all issues involving emotion. This is just Mr. Wong's opinion, but as we know now, his opinion is fact. How about we empirically test this proposition? Mr. Wong's anticipated response would be, "Some things in life aren't empirically verifiable, so you can never prove me wrong, because I have the moral high ground, therefore I win".
Human biodiversity (sociolobiology, evolutionary psychology, game, etc) is a logically consistent theory on human nature. But is it logical to acknowledge HBD in the social context of 21st century America? Of course not! I don't see what "normal people see" because by acknowledging HBD in public and on this blog, I simply do not do as normal people do--normal people would recognize the high risks associated with taking such a position and refrain from doing so. They are being logical by believing in illogical political, social, and biological frameworks, if that makes any sense.
I am devoted to the truth, however unpleasant that truth may be. To take Mr. Wong to task, we may say that I have an emotional attachment to the truth.
AD HOM ALERT--
I would just like to point out that when Mr. Wong first attacked my blog I thought he was a strapping young man around the age of 25 judging from the hysterical way he blogged. To my amazement, I later discovered he was in fact, a family man nearing the age of 40. Needless to say, Mr. Wong is very immature for his age. I hope to God that when I am at that stage in life I will be more mature and have much better things to do than attack people on the internet.