Category: Cochran

That Erudite Cochran Again

More shallow stupidity.

Mr. Clogged Arteries writes:

Now you see some signs of other stuff in Sicily or Calabria today, but that seems to be later, from Arab or Byzantine times.

“Stuff.” What “stuff?” Lasagna? Olive oil? A horse head in a bed? Oh, the idiot is talking about population genetics. As is typical of HBD, the analysis is shallow. The relative genetic continuity in Italy (Ancient-Modern) – contra the heavy breathing “movement” and Arthur “Pesci” Kemp – is not simply due to “the slaves all died out” or “the slaves were mostly European” but likely a combination of those two: many, not all, of the slaves died out, and the ones who were assimilated were for the most part European, and the others mostly NECs not very genetically distant (as would be Nigerians or Chinamen) from the native population. It’s not that there was absolute zero genetic influx, that is absurd, it’s that the influx was much smaller than is popularly believed, and was mostly European (with some Levantines mixed in). Likewise, the “stuff” in “Sicily or Calabria” from “Arab or Byzantine times” was also much smaller than is popularly believed, and mostly Near Eastern/North African NECs; the combination of a small influx of peoples not enormously distant from the native population didn’t alter things too much (granted the Near Easterners and North Africans may have carried some sub-Saharan alleles). This later influx also (subsequently) included Normans, French, Spaniards, and North Italians, further adjusting the population back in the (overall genetic) direction of its original constitution.

The Unbearable Stupidity of HBD (and Greg Cochran)


When that old IQ-GDP correlation doesn’t quite go the way the HBDers want, they sure know how to wave their hands around and excuse subpar perfomances by their Asian darlings (you know, the folks who cheat on achievement tests and only report test scores from well-educated urban populations).

The arterosclerotic Greg Cochran says:

…bad choices (Communism), having the world kick you in the crotch (Mongols), or toxic intellectual fads can all make smart peoples unproductive.

Yes sir, the Chinamen (but not the Slavs, no siree) are held back by the legacies of Communism. And those poor pacifistic Mongols have been kicked in the crotch by the world, don’t you know.
I mean, even for a misanthropic retard like Cochran, that’s beyond delusional. Hey Greg, I don’t know, but maybe the Mongols have been more the kickers than the kickees when it comes to global crotches, eh?
If memory serves, I do believe the Mongols established a vast empire through brutal warfare, terror, and the slaughter of civilian populations, followed by the exaction of tribute from the conquered peoples. And all that wealth and power resulted in what, pray tell? The Mongols are unique in human history in having established a long-standing empire lacking in any foundational cultural idea or impetus whatsoever. Ethnic Mongol cultural achievements: zero.
Hey, fundamentally dishonest HBDers – if you want to pick peoples of whom it can be reasonably said that they’ve been “kicked in the crotch by the world” how about the Balkans? Russians (Mongol conquest, Communism and genocidal Jewish commissars, Hitler’s invasion, Jewish looting of the post-Soviet economy)? The Irish? Sicilians? How about the Basques?
Oh wait…they’re not Asian, so historical excuses don’t count, eh?

Derbyshire Shilling Again

Same old, same old.

IQ, Cochran, positive things implied about East Asians/Chinese – does the child porn apologist Derbyshire ever get tired of himself?  Apparently, his “wife” has become tired of him, preferring to play with social media apps than dealing with the tiresome old bore of her “husband.”

I’ll say this: as critical of the “movement” as I have been, and will continue to be, I will shower with praise any “movement” “leader” or prominent “activist” who takes a consistently applied and loudly proclaimed principled stand against the HBD cult.  Let someone else beat the anti-HBD drum as I have done and I will elevate that individual to a higher level of esteem compared to the lowly, cringing “movement” masses who grovel in front of the Altar of Asia,

Another Creative Genius Fail

Dumb Cochran.

Before defending Jews (*) as innocent and naïve waifs who foolishly actually believe in the extreme egalitarianism they preach to the Gentile rubes, the “creative genius” unburdens himself thus:

gcochran9 says:
June 2, 2016 at 11:05 am
Considering that I have gone and on and about the lack of any built-in instinct to favor your own race, and explained why no such tendency is likely to evolve, I am hurt. But there is a simple solution to that.

Well, OK, that’s computer work.  What about Greg’s “real-life” examples?  Cherry picked?  Didn’t the Indians (dot, not feather) eventually work together to eject the British, for example?  Groups like Jews and Chinese are known to be high on ethnocentrism. Jews view themselves as akin to a race and there are more Chinese alive than all the Whites combined; Chinese are more or less a race as well.  And, certainly, East Asians living in other people’s nations have developed a very nice racial solidarity.

More to the point, contra Cochran and the rest of the HBD scum, IT DOES NOT REALLY MATTER.  As those of us with intellectual honesty (and common sense) have stated over and over again, the pursuit of ethnic genetic interests has nothing to do with the “evolution” of anything, but rather with rational thought mechanisms (that is beside the point that [evolved] ethnocentrism actually does exist, more in some groups than others; however, the fact remains that such innate ethnocentrism is not required for EGI).

But Cochran and the HBDers always either insinuate or openly state that “genetic interests cannot exist because we have not evolved X,Y,Z.”

They are frauds and liars, knocking down straw men.

But, let us turn it around.  Have humans evolved a preference for “high IQ” or any other of the ranked phenotypic traits so beloved of the HBDers?  Let’s look at the verdict of history, let us look at the experiment of real life!

Fact is, Greg, folks prefer dumb athletes, moronic celebrities, alpha male blowhard leaders, dark triad pick up artists, etc. over brainy scientists, academics, inventors, and HBD bloggers. That’s the evolved preference, from human evolution, to prefer the muscular hunter, the successful leader, the charismatic individual, the sexually attractive and successful, and to scorn the spindly brainy nerds unable to kill the mammoth, unable to inspire men into battle, and unable to excite the ardor of the opposite sex.

Folks prefer Babe Ruth over Albert Einstein, Kim Kardashian over Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Muhammed Ali over Bruce Lahn, Donald Trump over nebbish policy wonk Jeb Bush, and dim-witted and violent Negro athletes over balding and unattractive (and artery-clogged) New Mexican HBD bloggers.

That’s the way of the world, that’s our evolved preferences, so give it up Greg!  HBD is useless!  Who cares about IQ?

Oh wait, we will be told, we need to use rational thought mechanisms to decide what preferences are best, are most adaptive, and are better for us and for society, in the modern world.  Very good, very good.  Genetic continuity, including at the ethny level, is better for us in the modern world as well, you mendacious jackasses; in fact, genetic continuity is the very definition of biological adaptive fitness – more so than favoring some racial alien with a “high IQ.”

Once again, we are really getting tired of Cochran’s tiresome shtick as the “misanthropic, foul-mouthed, lovably ill-tempered creative genius.”  You’re boring Greg, a big YAWNfor you, and with increasing tribalism, the days of aracial HBD are numbered.  Unfortunately, the days of White survival are numbered as well, and the longer Whites waste time with the HBD cult, the less of a chance Whites have of out-living it.

Speaking of out-living: the unfortunate reality is that the wrong one died; in a just universe, Henry Harpending would still be alive and Greg Cochran would be the one dead. Well, it’s too late for the former, but we can still hold out hope for the latter.  How’s the ticker doing these days, Greggy?  Wouldn’t want you to get all worked up over at the blog you know.  Sudden heart attacks do happen, especially to those prone to them.  EGI Notes betting pool: who will drop dead first, Tricky Dick Lynn or Ticker Temper Cochran?  Dick is older, but Greg seems rather unhealthy.  Place your bets!

* A Judeophilic HBDer!  Who has ever heard of that?

A Creative Genius on the Reality of Race

One HBDer’s opinion on race.

I would suggest that any population – a group whose members have mated within that group, almost entirely, for some time – and has experienced strong-enough natural selection to change significantly in some trait that we give a shit about can usefully be considered a race.

My response to that elegant, eloquent, and articulate argument is to state that what I “give a shit” most about is genetic kinship. Yes, traits are important, but not more important than kinship. No doubt, parents would want their children to exhibit quality traits, but, for most normal parents, the paramount issue is that the children are their children. One would think that most parents – perhaps including HBDers – would not replace their own children for those of strangers who happen to exhibit better traits “that we give a shit about.” The same would, or should, apply to ethnies.

But the genetic architecture isn’t all that important: it’s the differences that matter. Pygmies are really short – that’s what matters.

The battle cry of HBD – genes don’t really matter, only phenotypic traits, and our subjective ranking of those traits according to personal values, matter. And then the HBDers accuse Salter of the naturalistic fallacy! 

Most genetic variation in humans is within-group, rather than between-group: so fucking what?

Well argued sir! Bravo! A creative genius indeed!  How can this nonsense compare to such honeyed words of wisdom?

Sidenote: Also amusing is the execrable mongrel Jayman’s assertion that he and the thing HBD Chick do not consider “Celt” populations to be NW European. After all, a triracial Jamaican and a self-described member of an “inbred ethnic group” are no doubt the best judges of what is, and is not, a NW European. Also interesting is the claim that non-NW European members of NW European societies all demand redistribution to themselves. Certainly, as we well know, wops. micks (*), hunkies, etc. are as represented on the welfare rolls as are, for example, Jamaicans and Hasidic Jews.

HBD, HBD, HBD marches on.

*Not considered “NW European” by the HBD retards.  What are they?  Leprechauns, perhaps?

Why Do Jews Look The Way The Do?

A hypothesis.
I have been seeing some “far-right” sites discussing the issue of Jewish physical appearance, and I remember one site having its members put up a rather extensive gallery of pictures of repulsive Jewish celebrities, which quite literally made me physically nauseous.  These sites usually discuss theories for the stereotypical physical appearance of (Ashkenazi) Jews, often invoking the “inbreeding” argument (see below).  Although I am really not interested in these HBD-style discussions, the trauma inflicted by viewing some of those faces has led me to propose my own ideas on this subject.
Two points.  First, this is not meant as any type of criticism or insult toward Jews.  It is instead a relatively dispassionate discussion of a very real phenomenon.  Most people, including I believe most Jews, understand that this is a group known for brains not beauty.  Of course, there are always exceptions; in biological phenomena, outliers always exist.  The existence of these exceptions by no means invalidates the reality that the typical Ashkenazi Jewish phenotype is very well represented by the likes of Anthony Weiner and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Second, this is a hypothesis, not a dogmatic insistence of reality.  Unlike the “movement” and HBD, I do not have The Lathe of Heaven Syndrome, there is no solipsism here.  Therefore, I do not cite data but merely provide ideas that constitute a hypothesis that requires more empirical testing.
I’m not going to bring up “Jewish inbreeding” as a mechanism for their physical defects, for the simple reason that some HBDers (e.g., Cochran) have been making a big song-and-dance about how the whole bottleneck/inbreeding thing for Jews is not true; I haven’t really looked at the data since I am not very interested.  I can make my arguments without invoking inbreeding and will therefore go ahead and do so.
Instead, here I assert that two major mechanisms account for the typically repulsive physical appearance of (Ashkenazi) Jews: their particular ancestral origins in the modern Middle/Near East coupled to admixture, and the lack of subsequent sexual selection for improved (mostly female) appearance.
Ashkenazi Jews are thought to have originated in the modern Middle/Near East in historical times, followed by entry into Europe and a significant initial degree of admixture with native Europeans (the paradigm is Middle Eastern males with European females; the Europeans initially were likely mostly Southern Europeans, with, later, Germanics and Slavs entering the picture as Jews infiltrated to the north and east).  The Middle Eastern origin of Jews is well revealed by the phenotypes of Jews such as Weiner, which betray (the nose! the nose!) the Near Eastern-Semitic-Araboid antecedents.  Many stereotypical Jewish physical traits, particularly facial traits, likely have their origin in this derivation from NEC Middle Eastern population streams.  However, that is not the full story.  After all, despite similarities, there are differences in appearance between Jews and Arabs; furthermore, the distinctive Ashkenazi appearance has more to do with an overall disharmonious, discordant, off-putting “affect” than it does with any grouping of single features (e.g., noses).  Therefore, it is not only the Middle Eastern origin that is the mechanism here, but the subsequent hybridization with European stocks, which led to a discordant mismatch of NEC and European features, a disharmonious combination of features that fit poorly together.  Even further, one can speculate that this combination never stabilized into a harmonious blend because of a lack of sexual selection for physical appearance, which is the subject of the next part of this analysis.
Many (most?) human groups have undergone some degree of sexual selection for physical appearance.  In many (Eurasian) groups, this is most directed at the female, but of course male appearance is also affected through inheritance of maternal traits.  Some HBDers (e.g., Frost) assert that this mechanism was most highly developed in the northern climes of Europe during the hunter-gatherer times (cue “movement” heavy breathing at the mention of hunter-gatherers), and this is likely true.  In any case, sexual selection for appearance occurred throughout Europe and in many areas of Asia as well.  It may well have also occurred in Negro Africa, but there focusing on male appearance (I do not speculate on Amerinds, but possibly they too partook in this mechanism, for which sex predominantly I do not know).
Jews, however, I see as different.  For them, sexual selection was about intelligence, ability, family connections, business or intellectual success.  A physically grotesque Jewess may very well have found eager marriage partners if she was the daughter of a successful businessman, rabbinical scholar, or some other sort of community leader. Thus, she would pair up with an equally grotesque male Jew, from an equally successful family, and they would produce ugly yet intelligent children, with a greater probability of survival than the children (if any were produced) of less intelligent Jews (of whatever physical appearance). Thus, for Jews, there was no “gracilization” of physical appearance that could have attenuated the distortions and unpleasant features derived from their unique ancestral origins. The Weiner and Bader Ginsburg phenotypes were thus perpetuated, along with high verbal intelligence, high ethnocentrism and neurotic intensity, and other stereotypical Jewish traits.
To summarize: The hypothesis is that the stereotypical (Ashkenazi) Jewish appearance is due to their origins rooted in the modern Middle/Near East, coupled to discordant admixture with European stocks, creating phenotypes that never became aesthetically stabilized and gracilized due to a lack of sexual selection for beauty.