Category: Lynn is a fraud

A Duel of Wits

Between unarmed opponents.

See this.

There is some good here, but also considerable nonsense. If the characterization of Richard Spencer’s racial views is correct, then Johnson’s racial views are sounder from an empiricist-materialist standpoint. However, there is much lacking here from a more hardcore scientific standpoint (the wages of “Traditionalism” I suppose). 

The whole “transplanted brains” scenario is absurd and meaningless intellectual masturbation.  What could one do? There are racial – and subracial (cue Durocher’s heavy breathing) – differences in brain structure that can be identified via imaging methodology.  If one were really determined to obtain a definitive identification, a small brain biopsy can yield DNA to assay for genetic ancestry and thus prove whether or not the brain tissue was of Negro origin. As far as the ridiculous question as to why build a community on race instead of other characteristics, I point both interviewer and interviewee to Salter’s On Genetic Interests. Adaptive fitness is the ultimate interest of evolved organisms (such as humans), and any group that promotes their ultimate interests will outcompete and replace those who do not. And, after all, one can always form these narrower communities within your racial group while preserving EGI, but the opposite is not possible.  One can form your little group of Tolkien fans among Whites in an all-White ethnostate, but a multi-racial Tolkien group that is not stratified by race (by definition, if it is multiracial and stratified only by Tolkienism, it will not be stratified by race) will constitute a loss of genetic interest.  Smaller groups within a White ethnostate will retain the advantages of a concentrated EGI; on the other hand, smaller groups of Whites in, say, a multiracial Tolkien Fanboy state, will suffer as a result of a loss of EGI, itself a consequence of the multiracialism of such a state. In the latter case, the situation can be retrieved only by racial separation – so why not  divide on the basis of race to begin with?

Stupidity about gender-specific nations also fails – I remember Bowery writing (correctly) long ago that gender/sex is not a genetic interest.  A man has more genetic commonality with female relatives and co-ethnics than with male non-ethnic strangers. One could subdivide a racially pure state by gender (for what purpose?) but the racial stratification must come first if one is concerned with biological fitness. If you are not concerned with fitness, fine, but that’s not an evolutionarily stable situation. You’ll end up in the dustbin of genetic history, replaced by more ethnocentric others. These are reasonably obvious arguments.  I would also point out that sexual reproduction has evolutionary advantages via increased genetic diversity. No doubt that a sufficiently advanced technology could artificially impose independent assortment and recombination on a single-sex artificial reproduction regimen, but, again, for what purpose?  While eliminating the yeastbucket requirement would no doubt be advantageous in many ways, what would be the sexual outlet for such an all-male society?  Widespread homosexuality?  I’ll take a pass on that. There are probably some things best left unchanged in human nature and the division between two sexes for reproduction is likely to be one of those.

And what’s with this obsession with Rushton and Lynn?  Look, the broad theories of both of them are likely true, but that’s as far as it goes. R-K theory on race (that I independently came up with in the 1980s after reading an ecology textbook) is undoubtedly true on the general level of – Blacks and Browns have more offspring and invest less in them; Whites and Yellows have fewer offspring but invest more in them. And, as well, Blacks and Browns have faster life histories (earlier maturation and reproduction and earlier death) than do Whites and Yellows. If Rushton had stuck with that, instead of trying to shoehorn every racial characteristic (including penis size) into the formulation, he’d be more respected today. Likewise, Lynn is likely correct that there is a general association between national IQ and economic productivity (as measured by GDP) and general accomplishment; the problem occurs when he falls too much in love with his theory (as did Rushton with his ideas) and tries to fit every data point into the pattern, with ludicrous “estimates of IQ,” racial history fairy tales about admixture, and hand waving “just so stories” to explain anomalies. The problem, I suppose, is that the broad theories are a bit too obvious and common sense, plain to any reasonably intelligent and honest observant individual, and so there isn’t much “intellectual prestige” in merely stating the obvious.  Therefore, ego-driven “intellectuals” have to build castles of sand to demonstrate how very clever they are.

Counter-Currents commentary:

Craig
Posted July 1, 2019 at 8:07 am | Permalink
Yang was a joke who never should have had any support from the Dissident Right in the first place. Those who did have made public fools of themselves.

Craig, meet Greg Johnson. And Richard Spencer. And many more.

Also, what’s the big deal about Gabbard? Oh she’s good on foreign policy. But so is Trump. He not once, but twice, averted war by outmaneuvering the warhawks in DC. First with Syria and now with Iran. He’s the peace candidate you should be voting for.

There’s no reason to pay attention to any of these clowns with a (D) in front of their name.

Craig, meet David Duke.  And Richard Spencer.

Then there’s John Morgan:

John Morgan
Posted July 1, 2019 at 6:33 am | Permalink
Rep. Gabbard seems to be the least bad (notice I’m not saying good) of all these people. It’s also worth mentioning her connections to/support of Hindu nationalist groups in India like the BJP and RSS (since she is a practicing Hindu herself). This doesn’t necessarily equate to sympathy for nationalism for white people, but it suggests she may at least have the vision to not be completely averse to it. In practice that may not mean much, however. But as Mr. Hampton wrote, she has no chance of getting the nomination this time around, anyway.

You know she supports reparations for Negroes, right?

A one, a one, a one two three….

Ted Cruz at least spoke up about this.  Antifa Don Trump, The God Emperor?  Silence.

MAGA!  Pepe! Kek!

Readers of this blog know that I am no apologist for homosexuals (of either sex) but I’m no apologist for hypocrisy either.  I mean, really….  Apparently, “homophobia” – “vile” or otherwise – is perfectly acceptable in the service of “movement” feuds.  Perhaps, Antifa can be critiqued in other ways than their penchant for sending gay Asians to the hospital.

Advertisements

Duchesne, Strom,and Lynn

In der news.

Listen to this.  That is a generally good podcast, and they – particularly Johnson – do a good job dissecting the SJW nonsense against Duchesne.  I regret to hear that Duchesne had to prematurely retire because of this outrageous situation.  The whole scenario does confirm everything I’ve been writing the last few days about how activists and potential activists need to be prudent and take care of themselves first. If even a tenured professor with excellent student comments can be forced out, how is some level military recruit going to survive?

I did not like Johnson’s comments about how professors use convoluted and incomprehensible language.  That may be the norm in the fields of Duchesnse and Johnson, but STEM people strive for clarity, particularly with all the ESL Asians reviewing papers and grants (and using any excuse to trash quality White work in order to open space for their own co-ethnics).

A good piece by Strom.  When he sticks to sociopolitical and broad racial themes, and not population genetics, he does well.  Despite my occasional criticism, I am thankful lo Strom for his ADV broadcasts in the 1990s that helped form my initial “movement” worldview (Pierce also contributed to this).  Criticism from my direction is never meant to be personal, but corrective.


Let’s look at this nonsense once again.  Emphasis added:

Richard Lynn: It was in 1977 when I discovered that the intelligence of the Japanese was 3 IQ points higher than that of white Americans. Hitherto, virtually all discussions of race differences in intelligence had been concerned with the problem of why white Americans and British had higher IQs than other peoples, and this was generally attributed to the tests being biased in their favor. My discovery about the Japanese set me thinking about whether other Northeast Asian peoples (Chinese and Koreans) have higher IQs that Europeans. I began collecting studies on this and found that they did.

Collecting studies  – such as Chinese testing done under problematical conditions and confined to coastal elites and college students, “estimating” IQ through PISA scores, and all the rest of the Lynnian flim-flam.

Richard Lynn: I regard the most important to be what I have called “the cold winters theory” to explain the evolution of race differences in intelligence. The theory explains the relation between the IQs of the races and the coldness of the winters. Thus, the Northeast Asians had to survive the coldest winters and evolved the highest IQs (105) followed by the Europeans (100), North Africans and South Asians (84) and sub-Saharan Africans (70). I first proposed this theory in 1991 and it has become widely accepted.

Widely accepted by who?  You and other HBDers and an assortment of Nutzis?  Let us put aside for the moment whether or not Lynn is correct. The assertion that his theory is “widely accepted” is plain wrong and borderline delusional.  Mainstream psychometricians, behavioral scientists, etc. do not endorse Lynn’s views.

Richard Lynn: “The Jews of the East” is a good description of the Chinese in Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries, including Malaysia, Cambodia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. In all these countries the Chinese have been minorities that have been more successful than the majority indigenous populations, just as the Jews have been in Europe and the United States, and for the same reason: they have higher IQs. I have documented this in my book The Global Bell Curve: Race IQ and Inequality Worldwide (2008).

Ethnocentrism and ethnic nepotism have nothing to do with that, no sir!  Lynn documents this by referring to…his own “work.”

Grégoire Canlorbe: Notwithstanding his early death following cerebral edema, martial artist and actor Bruce Lee may be seen as a successful case of Chinese-European crossbreeding. To what extent does the miscegenation between a white man (or woman) and a Chinese woman (or man) prove to be—generally speaking—more eugenic and healthy than the one between a white and an Arab or a Black?

The idea that you can justify miscegenation because of “look at that celebrity” is something the Left (or Derbyshire) promotes; it is the most juvenile and shallow type of “analysis” possible.  Look at Halle Berry!  Hubba Hubba!  That White-Back mixing is real eugenic and healthy!  I mean, these HBDers will say and do anything to promote their genocidal anti-White Jeurasian agenda.

Richard Lynn: Children inherit genes equally from both parents, and in large samples their children have the average of their fathers and mothers. Thus, if one parent has an IQ of 120 and the other has an IQ of 100, the average of their children will be 110. 

Evidence?  Well, you see 120 + 100 divided by 2 = 110, so that’s that!  HBD “science.”

But these are only averages, and there is a wide range of the IQs of siblings who typically differ by about 10 IQ points. With regard to mixed-race children, in my latest calculations, the Chinese have an average IQ of 105 and Whites have an average IQ of 100, so the average White-Chinese child will have an IQ 102.5. Arabs have an average IQ of 84 so Arab-White children will have an average IQ of 92, while blacks in sub-Saharan Africa have an average IQ of 70, so black-white children will have an average IQ 85, which is what they have in the United States. Of course, these are averages and there is a wide range of IQs in the parents and the children of all these groups.

Even IF these IQ scores are valid, and even IF IQ was completely genetic and heritable – which even Lynn himself does not believe, see below – why would anyone believe that the outcome of mixing is going to be in a simple additive fashion (even if averaged over large numbers of people)?  While some heritable traits do behave in a simple additive fashion, many, probably most, do not. To blithely assume that IQ is going to behave in such a fashion, in the absence of supportive evidence, is the height of childish stupidity.

Lynn’s retardation, and proof of my critique, is amply demonstrated by his own comment: “…while blacks in sub-Saharan Africa have an average IQ of 70, so black-white children will have an average IQ 85, which is what they have in the United States.”  “American” Blacks are not even 50:50 mixes of Whites and Black Africans – they are mostly African with a minority of White admixture.  Obviously then, if we take the IQ scores at face value, and even if we assume it is all genetic, it is NOT a simple additive model.  If American Negroes are ~ 80% African and ~ 20% European, how can you argue that a simple additive model of 100 IQ and 70 IQ is going to give 85 IQ?  Obviously, the genes for higher IQ are disproportionately influential or there has been selection or strong environmental influences.  Note that Canlorbe does not challenge Lynn about this obvious logical flaw.  Lynn is used to an “amen corner” of sycophants who agree with all his pontifications without a murmur of skepticism.  Obviously, this is not science.

Fourth, national IQs will continue to increase in economically developing nations. There may be some dysgenic fertility resulting in a decline in genotypic intelligence but this will be more than compensated for by improvements in nutrition, health, and education as it was in economically developed nations during most of the 20th century. 

Environmental effects, hmmm?

Fifth, there has been dysgenic fertility in China during the last half century. Despite this, there was a large increase of 15 IQ points in the intelligence of Chinese children from 1988 to 2006 as a result of improvements in nutrition, health, and education, and the average IQ of Chinese-British children in 2006 was estimated as 109.8.

Lynn admitting environmental effects on IQ…for Chinese.  For Europeans, well….no. And why assume that the Chinese immigrants to Britain were a representative sample of the main Chinese population?  This is all ludicrous – Lynn and his followers don’t even pretend to be doing real science, with hypothesis testing, skepticism, and controlling for variables. It’s a joke.

By 2016, the National Science Board reported that China had overtaken the United States in the number of articles published in science and technology.

Lynn of course leaves out that many of these articles are the result of rampant ethnic nepotism, with Chinese publishing in Chinese journals or in “Western” journals that have Chinese editors and reviewers (based on my observations, Chinese also engage in ethnic nepotism in grant reviewing). Ever read any of these Chinese articles?  Full of errors, omissions, sloppy methodology, lack of proper controls, incorrect interpretations.  But someone like Lynn is not going to critique shoddy scholarship, because that hits too close to home.

It is likely that this lead will grow as intelligence in China continues to increase, as it has in other economically developing nations, as a result of further environmental improvements. There is also likely to be an increase of intelligence in China with a reduction in air pollution which at present is lowering intelligence in many towns and cities. 

So here Lynn again admits environmental effects on IQ (see above).  Note that he defends Chinese IQ as being negatively influenced by environment, but he would never do the same for, say, Southern Italians (or the Irish).  Still think that HBD has no political motivation?

Thus, as intelligence continues to increase in China and decline in Europe and the United States, China is likely to emerge as the world’s superpower in the second half of the 21st century.

HBDers all spontaneously ejaculate.

HBD is the absolute worst “rightist” race-related paradigm. Virtually anything and everything else is better.  For example, Nordicism is, literally, infinitely superior to HBD.Nordicists at least ostensibly want to preserve, and promote in the interests of a subset of Europeans – “Germanics” of Northwest European descent.  HBDers on the other hand want Europeans humiliated and subjugated to Jews and Asians, and eliminated via a Jeurasian mongrelization.  HBD is the traitor within the gates; HBD is utter filth.

I deeply regret ever saying anything positive about the work of Lynn and Rushton; I do sometimes make errors, particularly in my early days as a Nutzi, and I openly admit these egregious mistakes.

Happy Barbarossa Day 2019

Comments and clarifications.

I am sure some on the Far Right are upset at the advice given here.

Some clarifications may be in order.  Some will protest the comments at the end.  What? You can’t advocate on behalf of Whites even in the corporate world or in academia? I did not say that; what I am saying is to be prudent.  If you are a tenured professor – and I am talking about real, rock-sold tenure here – then, yes, if you wish, publicly speak out, but you should still expect to be targeted.  

However, to engage in overt activism in the early stages of your career?  Would folks like MacDonald and Duchesne ever have been given tenure to begin with had their activism started from the first days in academia?  What do you think?

The same principles apply to the corporate world.

My advice about the military is even more obvious. The Nutzis will scream that Colored gangs and extremists are allowed, but that’s the point isn’t it?  Why doesn’t Der Movement ever take its own rhetoric seriously, take it at face value?  If you always proclaim that the System is anti-White, is genocidal, is unfair, then why be surprised at examples of all of that being true?

The military has always been a reflection of the nation as a whole. America 2019 is a White-hating, crazed, Far Left SJW Dystopia. The US Military 2019 is therefore likewise to be expected to be a White-hating, crazed, Far Left SJW Dystopia. What is so difficult to understand?  The military has made clear that it considers WN to be among the worst things ever, it will not tolerate WNs in its ranks, and it will weed these WNs out and dishonorably discharge them.  It seems that they would rather have a thousand Osama Bin Ladens in the military than a single Richard Spencer.  Very well.  It is what it is.  We do not have a draft; it is a volunteer force.  No one is making you sign up.  It is your choice.  If you choose to join a System institution that is anti-WN, and that makes clear it is hostile to expression of White racial interests, then you have to conform to those requirements.  Isn’t that obvious?  From the day you join to the day you leave, you have to reject WN, reject racialism, reject the “movement,” and follow the paradigm of “equality,” “diversity,” and “multiculturalism.” That’s your obligation for your service.  If you don’t like it or can’t do it, then don’t join.  If you join, then that’s what you have to do.  Once you leave you are of course free to follow whatever path you wish, but while in uniform you simply cannot be WN or any sort of pro-White activist. If you don’t have the self-discipline to understand and actualize these simple requirements, then you are not military material to begin with.  The essence of being in the military is obeying orders (except if you are a German soldier in WWII and then, mysteriously, obeying orders is a war crime); if you cannot do so, do not join. Arguments that the orders are “illegal” (even if true) will avail you nothing; good luck trying to argue that in military court.

I am not saying that the situation is right or fair or tolerable. I am merely saying that is the way it is, and you have to live your life in the society as it is. If you want to change that, then, by all means, be an activist, but then don’t sign up for the military, and don’t expect to be a successful businessman, academic, or accepted in a college, university, professional school, etc. Have realistic expectations of the outcome.

I give you advice based on what is best for YOU; the Quota Queens give you advice based on what is best for THEM.  I have no agenda; my advice is disinterested.  I’m not asking for your “D’Nations” nor do I try to convince you that giving money will make you “live in the Golden Age today.”  I’m just trying to advocate prudence and to prevent young White men from making errors they will regret long afterward.

The Quota Queens may rail against this reality, but let us consider.  When young White men get kicked out of the military because of “hate,” and have that on their record for life, will the Quota Queens offer these men jobs?  Will they share their “D’Nations” with them?  Or will they just shrug, fire off a dismissive tweet or two, and go back to shilling for shekels?  

Now, of course I believe that WNs should be able to freely join the military and advocate their politics. But that’s not the world we live in.  And whose fault is that?  The Quota Queens squandered decades of time, millions of dollars, and countless man hours of effort from their followers, achieving absolutely nothing.  Blame them, don’t blame the messenger who merely tells you what is what, and advises you on how to best deal with it.

An antidote to Yellow Supremacy.

This is HBD:

Notwithstanding his early death following cerebral edema, martial artist and actor Bruce Lee may be seen as a successful case of Chinese-European crossbreeding. To what extent does the miscegenation between a white man (or woman) and a Chinese woman (or man) prove to be—generally speaking—more eugenic and healthy than the one between a white and an Arab or a Black?…Thus, as intelligence continues to increase in China and decline in Europe and the United States, China is likely to emerge as the world’s superpower in the second half of the 21st century.

Yellow Supremacy.  Jeurasian mongrelization. Who has been warning you about this? That’s right, the “crazy and bitter” Ted Sallis. HBD is the vicious enemy of White racial interests.  The mantra of the HBDers: You’re all doomed, Whitey, so just surrender to the Yellow Man, and race-mix yourself out of existence with flat-chested, buck-toothed Chinatrices.

When is this trash Lynn going to drop dead anyway?  Rushton and Brand are waiting for him in hell. And why is that effeminate French toothpick always given a forum on ostensibly pro-White sites?

Ted laughs:

This is bait-and-switch by an administration that didn’t deliver on its main campaign promises, and yet another sign the Trump administration isn’t a nationalist new beginning for the GOP. It’s one last gasp of Conservatism Inc. and one last grift of its supporters.

Hey, Hood, what websites were calling Trump “the last chance for White America?”  And who was calling him a fraud for the past three years?  Dishonesty by omission.

What a buffoon.  Perhaps the worst writer in the history of pro-White activism.

We Are Not All the Same

Genes, Race, IQ, and disease.

One refutation of Lynn, and three papers with emphasis added.

Refuting Lynn, refuting the Alt Wrong/Alt Yellow.  Amren weeps.

Read here.

BACKGROUND:
Although cell lines are an essential resource for studying cancer biology, many are of unknown ancestral origin, and their use may not be optimal for evaluating the biology of all patient populations.
METHODS:
An admixture analysis was performed using genome-wide chip data from the Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) Cell Lines Project to calculate genetic ancestry estimates for 1018 cancer cell lines. After stratifying the analyses by tissue and histology types, linear models were used to evaluate the influence of ancestry on gene expression and somatic mutation frequency.
RESULTS:
For the 701 cell lines with unreported ancestry, 215 were of East Asian origin, 30 were of African or African American origin, and 453 were of European origin. Notable imbalances were observed in ancestral representation across tissue type, with the majority of analyzed tissue types having few cell lines of African American ancestral origin, and with Hispanic and South Asian ancestry being almost entirely absent across all cell lines. In evaluating gene expression across these cell lines, expression levels of the genes neurobeachin line 1 (NBEAL1), solute carrier family 6 member 19 (SLC6A19), HEAT repeat containing 6 (HEATR6), and epithelial cell transforming 2 like (ECT2L) were associated with ancestry. Significant differences were also observed in the proportions of somatic mutation types across cell lines with varying ancestral proportions.
CONCLUSIONS:
By estimating genetic ancestry for 1018 cancer cell lines, the authors have produced a resource that cancer researchers can use to ensure that their cell lines are ancestrally representative of the populations they intend to affect. Furthermore, the novel ancestry-specific signal identified underscores the importance of ancestral awareness when studying cancer.

Racial genetic differences mean that results obtained with cancer cell lines from one race may very well be NOT applicable to other races.  There are indeed racial differences in gene sequences and gene expression, with clinically significant implications for patients.

Read here.

BACKGROUND:
We examined racial differences in the expression of eight genes and their associations with risk of recurrence among 478 white and 495 black women who participated in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study Phase 3.
METHODS:
Breast tumor samples were analyzed for PAM50 subtype and for eight genes previously found to be differentially expressed by race and associated with breast cancer survival: ACOX2, MUC1, FAM177A1, GSTT2, PSPH, PSPHL, SQLE, and TYMS. The expression of these genes according to race was assessed using linear regression and each gene was evaluated in association with recurrence using Cox regression.
RESULTS:
Compared to white women, black women had lower expression of MUC1, a suspected good prognosis gene, and higher expression of GSTT2, PSPHL, SQLE, and TYMS, suspected poor prognosis genes, after adjustment for age and PAM50 subtype. High expression (greater than median versus less than or equal to median) of FAM177A1 and PSPH was associated with a 63% increase (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09-2.46) and 76% increase (HR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.15-2.68), respectively, in risk of recurrence after adjustment for age, race, PAM50 subtype, and ROR-PT score. Log2-transformed SQLE expression was associated with a 20% increase (HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.03-1.41) in recurrence risk after adjustment. A continuous multi-gene score comprised of eight genes was also associated with increased risk of recurrence among all women (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.04-1.19) and among white (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.03-1.27) and black (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.02-1.20) women.
CONCLUSIONS:
Racial differences in gene expression may contribute to the survival disparity observed between black and white women diagnosed with breast cancer.

Health disparity differences in outcome for breast cancer in White vs. Black women have a genetic basis.

Read this.

Age at menarche (AM) and age at natural menopause (ANM) define the boundaries of the reproductive lifespan in women. Their timing is associated with various diseases, including cancer and cardiovascular disease. Genome-wide association studies have identified several genetic variants associated with either AM or ANM in populations of largely European or Asian descent women. The extent to which these associations generalize to diverse populations remains unknown. Therefore, we sought to replicate previously reported AM and ANM findings and to identify novel AM and ANM variants using the Metabochip (n = 161,098 SNPs) in 4,159 and 1,860 African American women, respectively, in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) and Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) studies, as part of the Population Architecture using Genomics and Epidemiology (PAGE) Study. We replicated or generalized one previously identified variant for AM, rs1361108/CENPW, and two variants for ANM, rs897798/BRSK1 and rs769450/APOE, to our African American cohort. Overall, generalization of the majority of previously-identified variants for AM and ANM, including LIN28B and MCM8, was not observed in this African American sample. We identified three novel loci associated with ANM that reached significance after multiple testing correction (LDLR rs189596789, p = 5×10⁻⁰⁸; KCNQ1 rs79972789, p = 1.9×10⁻⁰⁷; COL4A3BP rs181686584, p = 2.9×10⁻⁰⁷). Our most significant AM association was upstream of RSF1, a gene implicated in ovarian and breast cancers (rs11604207, p = 1.6×10⁻⁰⁶). While most associations were identified in either AM or ANM, we did identify genes suggestively associated with both: PHACTR1 and ARHGAP42. The lack of generalization coupled with the potentially novel associations identified here emphasize the need for additional genetic discovery efforts for AM and ANM in diverse populations.

There seems to be genetic differences underlying reproductive lifespan in women of different races.  I hypothesize that Negro females would tend to possess variants promoting earlier reproduction.  Blacks and Hispanics have earlier puberty than Whites.

HBD and the Rushton Case

Continuing my discussion of the Rushton fiasco.

Let’s continue our analysis of the Rushton case and what it says about HBD.

An important point that needs to be made: just because Rushton was a disgusting and despicable excuse for a human being, and, according to Dutton, fudged data and interpretations, does not logically imply that r-k theory as regards humans (or more properly, hominids – or australopithecines?) is not correct in its broadest sense.

The thing is, contra fawning “movement” fanboys, the whole r-k theory isn’t particularly innovative or earth-shattering.  It is actually quite obvious. Indeed, back in the 1980s – many years before I ever heard of Rushton and his work – I was reading an ecology textbook, came across a discussion of r-k life strategies, and immediately – emphasis on immediately – realized that this can apply to “humans” as well, with Blacks and Hispanics being “r” and Whites and (East) Asians being “k.”

Now, Rushton certainly deserves credit for coming out and publicly stating the hypothesis, and credit he does get here for that.  The problem with these HBD types is that they fall in love with their own theories, and descend into laughable pseudoscience, and sometimes outright fraud, in order to hysterically defend those hypotheses, rather than subject them to rigorous hypothesis testing, as the Popperian scientific method would suggest.  No, these guys are hyper-Kuhnians, and will defend the dogma at all costs.

An example is the IQ-GDP correlation, what Lynn has been banging the drum about for decades.  The idea that there would be a correlation between national IQ and national GDP – just as there is between individual IQ and personal income/wealth – is obvious, even trivial.  But – and this is a big but – that’s at a very coarse-grained, looking from a distance, view.  When one looks more fine-grained, looks at the details, looks up close, one finds exceptions, many outliers, cases that defy the dogmatic explanation, alternative mechanisms that sometimes better explain the data, etc.  Upon rigorous testing, the strict interpretation of the hypothesis is proven wrong, the hypothesis, in its most strict and fine-grained sense, is falsified.  However, it remains valid as a very general principle, and has some utility in that sense.  But that’s not good enough for these types, with their absurd spin, invented just-so stories, ignoring of contradictory data, “estimates” of IQ rather than reproducible direct measurements, and absolute refusal to even admit the possibility of being wrong about even the most trivial cases.  That’s pseudoscience, that’s HBD.

The same applies to r-k.  In the very broad sense, it is probably true – but even then requires constant and rigorous testing – but it obviously breaks down when one looks at the details.  In some cases, in some details, in some traits, Negroes may be k-selected, and Chinamen r-selected; rather than admit this, Rushton ignored the facts that “went against the general trend.”  Like all HBDers he never even considered the possibility he could be wrong, and never really took opposing views seriously.  The opposition you see was “politically motivated” and “personally motivated” – as if the same could not be said about Rushton himself and all the other HBDers themselves.

Life is messy – Rushton’s life is a perfect example: compare the details of his personal life to what his work was about and to the ideals fervently believed in by “movement” Rushtonites.  It’s almost as if Pierce had married a Jew, or Duke was discovered to have half-Black children.  I won’t even mention the actual realty of Strom Thurmond here.  Life is messy and so life science – including social science (if it is even really a science) – is messy as well.  Let’s not pretend it isn’t and by so doing leave open vulnerable spots in our views that can be attacked by the Left.

The ultimate problem is that HBD in its stupidity and pseudoscience smears genuine racial science, since the two are conflated by the Left and by the general public.  Thus, when Rushton is (justifiably) discredited, it reflects badly on all of us, not only where it belongs – solely on the HBD scum.

If the Right had any sense of being right (no pun intended) they would denounce Rushton, not only for what the specifically did but also because of the damage the inevitable revelations have on the cause.  His work needs to be critically examined more than ever, and that work shown to be based on fraud and/or bad science should be denounced and withdrawn.

Sunday Movement Roundup

In all cases, emphasis added.

Lydia is certainly not lacking in chutzpah:

“White supremacy” is an “industry” now. And we are supposed to be part of it!
Who knew? Where are the profits?!

Where are the profits?  They’re over here.

The pitiful fact-denial of Type I losers is in full force:

Return of Shawn says:
July 27, 2018 at 4:30 pm
Without corroborating evidence, I see no reason to believe these startling comments about Rushton.

Interesting that his buddy, pseudoscientist Richard “Tricky Dick” Lynn – who has co-authored work with Dutton – doesn’t deny any of it:

Lynn remembers Rushton as a kind, brave, original thinker who made significant achievements in his career. He said the late psychologist fearlessly defended his work and was open with people close to him.
“I should say a fair bit is known by his friends and he made no attempt to conceal anything,” Lynn said in an email.

It’s all a conspiracy against the great man, a conspiracy I tell you!

And by the way, apart from the personal horrors disclosed about randy Phil, the errors and omissions of his “work” are “corroborated” – and “corroborated” by a fellow HBDer like Dutton.  But, hey, as we know, the Type I scum of Der Movement are allergic to facts – if Rushton’s impregnation of the married Black woman was filmed and the Type I fanboys saw it, they’d still deny it.  Der Movement is not only a money-making industry, it is also a religion (and aren’t religions the most successful money-making industries of all?). Religion is based on blind faith and rigid dogma, the best description of Der Movement one can imagine.

So far, part from TOO, Der Movement Inc. is being real quiet concerning the devastating revelations about Rushton.

Speaking of quiet, Bolton’s Yockey book is, as I predicted, being ignored by “movement” retards.  Yes, TOO ran Sunic’s Foreward, very good, but that’s part of the book itself, not an independent review.

Makes sense.  The anti-Arktos Yockey cultists (who, ironically enough [or maybe not, this is Der Movement after all] disagree with Yockey’s fundamental premise) childishly make believe the book does not exist, while the pro-Arktos Beavis-and-Butthead brigade have more important issues to concern them.

That’s what the Campanian and Calabrian mountain wops were drinking while they were hiding out from the Moops (who were spreading their seed along the shorelines and islands).  Hence, Conte’s ultra-Nordic pureblood physiognomy, which is why he looks like a young Dolph Lundgren rather than a young Lou Barletta.

Will this be the next diet advocated by Mangan and Roissy?  But, hey, Mangan would probably sprinkle whey protein powder on his steak, making the full use of the bovine!

SLC News, 4/17/18

More rightist news and commentary.

A decent video.

One picture is worth a thousand words.

Read this nonsense.

Left to its own devices, science tends ever downward.

Hmmm. What tends ever upward?  I know…gnostic esoteric traditionalism and theosophical scifi/fantasy!

The pyramids of Atlantis were built with psychokinesis!  The Titans are Marching! Ostara!  Ostara!  Kali Yuga!  Guenon!  The men who can’t tell time!  The Age of Tungsten!  HBD!  French Army Surgeon!  The Spectral!  The Spectral! 

The anti-scientific bent of the Right was, is, and remains, an embarrassment.

Yes, science is a tool and is not “on anyone’s side.”  That said, the totality of the current evidence derived from science does in fact strongly support the general viewpoint of White racialism (which is not the same as the specific viewpoints of Der Movement, Inc.).

Why then isn’t science being effectively utilized to support the Far Right position?

1. The Right traditionally (no pun intended) has been hostile to science, derived from reactionary/religious/traditionalist tendencies tied to Rightist thought, tendencies that frown upon the ability of science to trash long-established myths and traditions; the Right hates the transgressive ability of science to cut through established, fossilized memes and get to the facts of the matter. The Right is a socially hostile environment for scientists and the science-minded in general; the Right has been, and continues to be, hostile to empiricism and scientific materialism.  The Far Right has always been more interested in theosophical nonsense, esoteric fantasies, and pseudoscience (e.g., of the HBD or ethnic fetishist varieties) than in genuine hard science.

2. When scientists do (rarely) speak the truth, they get subject to social pricing from the System; there is a reason why “Watsoned” is a verb (originally coined by me and not Sailer).

So, the Left has a monopoly on the scientific enterprise, which they twist for political purposes, while the Right is left gibbering in a corner about Atlantis, Kali Yuga, and Ancient Egypt as a “Nordic Desert Empire.”

Who on the Far Right has a “hard science” background?  Yes, there are academics, but I’m talking about the core STEM fields, at the level of, say, MD or PhD or MD/PhD. Today, insofar as I know, only the “crazy and bitter” Ted Sallis.  In the past, Pierce.  I did know of one STEM college professor in the 90s who was a NA member, and there are possibly some today, but no one I know of who is active, even under a pseudonym.  This absence of STEM in the Far Right is more of an indictment of the Right than it is of STEM.  A “movement” that takes seriously the likes of Jorjani and Kemp, and rants about “the pyramids of Atlantis,” cannot reasonably expect to be an attractive destination for the science-minded. And regards science, I’m talking the authentic variety, not HBD pseudoscience (most of which is peddled by “social science” types anyway).

Speaking of HBD pseudoscience.

The fruits of HBD.

But if Indians aren’t the right choice for merit-based immigration, then who—Chinese? A Chinese friend of mine who recently visited Taiwan told me that Taiwanese are increasingly siding with Mainland China because they want to be on the side of a country growing in wealth and power. This person said trying to talk to them about human rights, freedom, and democracy was like trying to upload a new brain to a robot.
This friend agreed that the combination of an ancient culture and new wealth tends to give both Indians and Chinese an arrogant feeling of superiority—that they have nothing to learn from Americans about individual freedom and democracy. They are here to make money. They don’t want to assimilate and become real Americans.

Never forget: when all is said and done, and one looks at the core consequences of ideas, then HBD is simply a political movement to advantage Asians (including Jews) over Whites.  It is Asian Supremacism.

Donate to the Happy Penguins because of…VennerIs this a new low in tin cup panhandling?

Laugh at this (by the way, more Sailer real estate posting).

What kind of name is “Zasloff?”  

What kind of idiot thinks that Whites – Whites with children at any rate – will “integrate” “vibrant” areas for $10,000?  How about some of these Jewboys show the way?