Category: pseudoscience

Born Neandertal

Biological realities.

Read here.  Neandertals were born, not ”made.”  

Neandertal and modern human adults differ in skeletal features of the cranium and postcranium, and it is clear that many of the cranial differences—although not all of them—are already present at the time of birth. We know less, however, about the developmental origins of the postcranial differences. Here, we address this deficiency with morphometric analyses of the postcrania of the two most complete Neandertal neonates—Mezmaiskaya 1 (from Russia) and Le Moustier 2 (from France)—and a recent human sample. We find that neonatal Neandertals already appear to possess the wide body, long pubis, and robust long bones of adult Neandertals. Taken together, current evidence indicates that skeletal differences between Neandertals and modern humans are largely established by the time of birth.

 

That’s interesting.  More relevant to issues of interest to this blog is the following from the same paper:

Adult European Americans and African Americans differ, on average, in the shapes of their long bones, with European Americans having thicker shafts and larger articulations relative to shaft length.

But, but, but…aren’t racial differences all “skin deep” – just about color – and that other than such trivialities, we are all “exactly the same?”  You mean, there are actual anatomical differences between the races (never mind the genetic gulf)?

Race denial is a farce.  Real racial science is caught between the laughable lies of the Left and the HBD pseudoscience and crazed ethnic fetishism of the Right.  Fighting the former doesn’t mean we have to accept the latter.  Both are wrong (but, admittedly, the former is more dangerous).

And speaking of the Left, and getting back to the main article, did anyone truly believe that extreme Neandertal robustness was somehow the result of lifestyle?  Is anti-genetic leftism so entrenched in science that it goes to that extreme of ludicrousness?   Were the Neandertals constructing makeshift barbells out of boulders and tree trunks and engaging in Ice Age powerlifting routines?  Granted, yes, I understand (unlike Der Movement) that things need to be demonstrated empirically, and not just assumed.  But still, one cannot pretend that a demonstration that Neandertal robustness was an inborn trait is any sort of grand discovery.  Only leftists would be surprised by this finding.

Advertisements

The Corruption of American Science

On the scientific method and the corruption of the American scientific enterprise.

I’ve written before on how the late Dr. Harpending defined science in this video; focus in on around the 8:00-9:15 time marks.  Harpending – who was absolutely correct there – was of course talking about the Popperian (*) epistemology – the “scientific method” many of us leaned in school and which many scientists pay superficial lip service to.  That is, come up with a hypothesis, and then try to DISPROVE it, and whatever idea can withstand repeated attempts at falsification is – for the time being, and for the time being only – believed to the extent of “this is the best available hypothesis we have now, but we are prepared to dispose of it if the data say otherwise, at which point a new hypothesis needs to be devised and tested.”  The Kuhnian (**) epistemology, in contrast, considers the scientific enterprise as being subjective, affected by the worldviews and underlying biases of scientists themselves.  In this approach to science, paradigms exist, and scientists attempt to make the data fit into the paradigm, into their already existing preconception.  They attempt to PROVE, rather than disprove, their hypotheses.  Over time, a sort of cognitive dissonance develops, in that trying to fit square pegs into round holes, real data into faulty hypotheses, becomes untenable; then the old paradigm collapses and a new one emerges – the so-called paradigm shift.

Observing how science is actually performed supports Kuhn’s observations and criticisms; in reality, Harpending is being too generous, or naive, in his implication that most scientists are objectively skeptical.  He mentions “true believers” and also “global warming” – isn’t it true that the vast majority of scientists support the idea of anthropomorphic global warming and become hysterical over any criticism about it (***)?

In a sense, we can say that Popper was being prescriptive rather than descriptive; Kuhn the opposite.  Popper was telling us how things should be done; Kuhn how they are actually done.  Although both Popper and Kuhn were Jewish, one could view the more objective Popperian approach as more Western, and thus be tempted to blame the current emphasis on Kunhianism on the influence of Jews and Asians in science.  Truth be told though, White Gentiles are often Kuhnian of their own initiative, and there have always been scientific Kuhnians among Whites even before the Jew-Asian influx.  It is human nature to become enamored by, and defensive of, one’s own hypotheses and theories, to promote one’s ideas, and it is good for career advancement to do so as well.  

A perfect example of Kuhnian science veering into pseudoscience is HBD; have you ever seen an HBDer critically examine, and attempt to falsify, their pet theories?  Or do they hysterically defend failed hypotheses and attempt to shoehorn data where it simply doesn’t fit?  The Lynn-Rushton school is the “poster-boy” for this: the paradigm of IQ-GDP-racial/ethnic differences in intelligence,“estimating” IQ from nationally reported knowledge tests, brain size vs. penis size, r vs. k selection applied to everything from bad weather to the price of milk (a useful concept over-interpreted), etc. – when have any of these guys ever admitted even the remotest possibility of being wrong about anything?

So, I cannot honestly blame Jews and Asians for the Kuhnian approach to science that is extant everywhere, although they certainly enthusiastically practice it themselves.

Where Jews and Asians have corrupted (American) science is through three major mechanisms.  First, we have ethnic nepotism, which is actually more of an issue with Asians, particularly Chinese and Indians, than with Jews (who do practice it, but whose career-mongering often conflicts with a degree of collectivist ethnocentrism less pronounced than Asians, so Jews in science sometimes engage in bitter and hateful feuds against each other).  With respect to hiring, grant reviewing, and paper reviewing, Asians in particular favor their own (and will, when necessary, equally disfavor outgroup competitors).  Whites of course reject and eschew ethnic nepotism for themselves; in fact, quite the opposite – I observe that many Whites in science favor Asians over their fellow Whites.  The net result of this is the dispossession of White Americans from the American scientific enterprise, a situation amplified by the fact that the alien influx depresses wages, lowers prestige, and creates hostile environments foreign to the native White ethny.  The ethnic nepotism, corrosive as it is to merit-based advancement, also makes fraud and mediocrity more prevalent, and thus inhibits genuine scientific and technical advancement.

The second mechanism of corruption is the Jew-Asian promotion of rampant “careerism” in science – the idea that shameless self-promotion, rent-seeking behavior, and shallow career metrics should trump genuine scientific and technical advancement.  To be fair, careerism has always been present, giant egos among tops scientists have always been present, the desire for advancement, fame, and money has always been present.  But Jews and Asians – led by the Jews but amplified by Asian ethnic nepotism and anti-Faustian Asian greedy materialism – have made an entire entrenched culture out of this.  It’s all about grant money, getting papers published in “big journals,” prestige and status – and the actual science, the actual integrity of the science, and the actual contribution to human progress, be damned.  It’s all shallow and incremental “gains” (taking intellectual risks is frowned upon; why take genuine scientific risks when the entire purpose of careerism is to ensure a safe and steady stream of money and promotion, with prestige built upon an edifice of quantity over quality, shameless self-promotion of incremental progress, and ethnic horn-blowing to trumpet mediocrity as the equivalent of fundamental discoveries?).  In careerism, grants and papers are not means to an end (funding important science and them disseminating the knowledge thus created) but ends in themselves, or, perhaps, means to selfish ends. “Grantsmanship” is a euphemism for Semitic-Asiatic flim-flam, “suggesting reviewers” for papers is a euphemism for ethnic nepotism, and no one really cares for the scientific enterprise as a vehicle for the Faustian urge to overcome, as a means to ascend, as a path to human progress.  You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and the ethnoracial types swarming into American science today come from backgrounds foreign to the entire Faustian impulse.


The third mechanism?  That’s the one that the “movement” talks most about, and which is primarily the responsibility of Jews: the politicalization of science to distort fact, confuse interpretation, and obfuscate reality, in order to promote a leftist (and usually anti-White) agenda.  The “work” of Gould and Lewontin are typical examples of this genre.  Much has been written on this particular subject, so I need not dwell on it further here.


Well, I could actually extend this and cite a fourth mechanism as well, which is related to the second mechanism discussed above.  Jewish/Asian science is inherently anti-Faustian, not surprising coming from ethnies outside of the Western High Culture.  Thus, the Jewish/Asian-influenced American scientific enterprise stresses small, incremental, and “safe” projects, and essentially scorns “high risk/high reward” projects that could, if successful, lead to real conceptual breakthroughs.  Also, American science has become overly descriptive and insufficiently “interventionist” (prescriptive).  For example, a typical successfully funded grant in, say, the field of biomedicine would feature an incremental and narrow project, drilling into (already studied) minute (and almost irrelevant) details on the mechanisms of some disease – description, as opposed to, say, a novel gene therapy approach to actively address the disease by targeting the mechanisms – intervention/prescription.  Further, and a perfect example of anti-Faustianism, there is a knee-jerk reaction of calling extremely revolutionary ideas “impossible” – this would be prevalent, for example, in the realm of physics, energy research, space travel/propulsion, cosmology, etc.  There’s always an inward, navel-gazing, small-minded, “can’t do” attitude with Jewish/Asian-influenced science.  Finally, “who/whom” is emphasized, and not only for ethnic nepotism.  A mediocre idea by a “rock star” scientist is given precedence over a cutting edge idea by a relative unknown. “Appeal to authority” wins every time.

Thus, the corruption of science.

Notes:

*Popper was a despicable Jew, whose “paradox of intolerance” writings were the archetype of disgusting self-contradictory Orwellian Semitic flim-flam, and his overall political philosophy was anti-“Aryan.” Nevertheless, his views on science were fundamentally sound, although one can always quibble about details, for example, his defense of the Jew Einstein against the European Bohr, re: quantum mechanics (by Popper’s own scientific method, Bohr’s views on the subject have been repeatedly validated, and Einstein’s views refuted).

**Kuhn being another Jew.  It’s disturbing that we had two racial/cultural aliens defining and debating the structure of Western science; is this perhaps another focal point of corruption?

***I’m not expressing an opinion here, one way or the other, about “man-made global warming,” but rather casting doubt about mainstream scientific objectivity on the subject.  However, one must say at this point that there are some facts that have been so reliably and reproducibly verified, and have so strongly resisted falsification, that we can more or less accept their veracity (while always, in theory, being willing to change with new data).  It would be silly to label as a “true believer” someone who accepts that the Earth is (more or less) spherical and not flat.  The reality of biological differences between ethnies, including genetic differences, is of a similar nature.  Being skeptical is one thing, ignoring nature is another.

Salter-Woodley Podcast

Troubling dysgenic decline.

This video is a very interesting podcast from 2016 between Drs. Salter and Woodley concerning the real trends in changing population IQ.  While IQ is not a topic I often discuss, it is important, and is a topic that is tainted by pseudoscience from both the Left as well as the Right.  I do not know much about Woodley, but he sounds like a solid and honest academic from this podcast, so let’s consider some major points (as an aside – I wish more such excellent podcasts like this would be made by Salter).

First, we are in the midst of a troubling dysgenic decline in real IQ – perhaps as much as approximately one IQ point per decade.

Second, it is interesting that some of the more “culture-loaded” IQ tests are the most heritable, suggesting gene-culture ties.

Third, the Flynn effect mantra of the Left is put into its proper perspective, as something not measuring raw heritable g-loaded IQ, and in fact obscuring the reality of a dysgenic loss of IQ that is causing a relative decline in the production of geniuses, scientific/technical innovations, and important cultural artifacts.

Fourth, allegedly “fair” IQ tests like Raven’s are not so “fair” at all, and not as g-loaded as presumed. Although not mentioned in this podcast, if Raven’s is not “fair” do you suppose PISA test scores are?  The pseudoscience is, as mentioned above, from the Right as well as the Left.

Fifth, although I’m not much interested in sports, the fact that reaction times have been slowing over the past century provides food for thought – thought indirectly linked to racial activism since the “bread and circuses” masses love sports, and thus sports, as part of mass pop culture, affects the race-culture problem.

I note there is a rough correlation between sociopolitical views and ideas about athletic performance over time.  Those on the Left are more prone to “overrate the present” and lionize (mostly Colored) modern athletes as far superior to the (mostly White) athletes of the past. Those on the Right are less likely to casually dismiss the “traditional sports heroes” of the past.

Now, if reaction times are really slowing, then what can we say about athletic performance in sports in which reaction time is important – hitting a baseball for example (or boxing or hockey)? It puts into question leftist assumptions rooted in jock sniffing the Negro athlete. The components of performance related to reaction time – fundamental for some sports – would seem to be declining, not improving, over time.

Indeed, reaction times differ by race, with Negroes being the slowest, which again makes one question whether the Negro athlete of today is superior to the White athlete of the past (and, of course, intra-racial White-White cross-era comparisons of declining reaction time question leftist assumptions about sports as well).  One can make counter-arguments that athletes do not represent the overall population, and that Victorian England was one specific sample, and that of course other factors than reaction time are important in athletic performance, etc. but still, the idea is provocative.  The Caste Football pro-White sports types probably need to look into the implications of declining reaction times in making cross-era sports comparisons, implications favorable to a narrative of a Golden Age of White American sports.

In any case, getting back to the main topic, the loss of IQ, coupled with the worsening racial situation (increases in the population of the dumbest races) means that dark (in all meanings of that word) times are ahead for humanity, unless these trends can be arrested and then reversed.

Yet More Race and Movement News: 8/3/17

Several items.

Well, well, well…that’s a surprise.  But if they really investigate, they’ll find a huge number of colleges (most) discriminate against Whites – particularly White men – in admissions.

Yeah…can’t the “God Emperor” eliminate affirmative action on the Federal government level (government hiring) simply by signing a decree to that effect?  Colleges are another thing of course, but why doesn’t he do what he has the authority to do?

Some more good news…immigration restriction?  Note that pink-frilled female GOP senator Miss Lindsey Graham objects.  We need dem dere restaurant workers!

I thought Antifa was “shrugged off?”

Three points:

1. Remind me who the President and Attorney General are again.  Have they declared Antifa a terrorist organization yet?  Civil rights violations by Antifa?  Attempted murder charges – holding someone under water?

2. I thought the security there were “tough state police who don’t take guff from anyone?”

3. Obviously, private security is required at such meetings, or even something as informal as attendees always moving around in “wolf pack” groups for self-protection.  Obviously, the “don’t take guff” security there are more interested in arresting attendees who are trying to defend themselves against being murdered.

HBD marches on.

This highly observant attendee wasn’t afraid to take the podium to present what he considered to be a serious problem for Nyborg’s thesis. If cold climates create strong selective pressures for high IQ, why aren’t the Inuit one of the smartest peoples on Earth? Nyborg responded that in certain areas, the local ecosystem is limited by the amount of solar energy reaching that location year-round, which in turn limits the extent to which the population can grow, which in turn leads to inbreeding depression as people in small populations will end up reproducing with others from whom they aren’t very genetically distant.

Nyborg’s explanation could possibly be correct.  It also possibly is yet another example of the HBDers using Occam’s Butterknife to hand-wave ad hoc explanations to excuse refuted hypotheses.  Consider: when was the last time you read or heard an HBDer say – “I was wrong” or “Maybe I am wrong” or “Yes, the data do not fit my hypothesis, perhaps the hypothesis is wrong and needs to be reconsidered” or “Yes, my hypothesis is wrong, we need something new?”  Answer: never.  That’s because HBD is absolute pseudoscience, or, if you want to be more charitable, it is hardcore Kuhnian science without a picogram of Popperian epistemology.

Sallis vs. the Survey

Differing opinions.

It is interesting, but not surprising, how my opinions differ from that of the survey here.

For example, I see the videos by Taylor as by far the best feature of that site, by a large margin. Commentary finished first in the survey. “Science and genetics” is a topic that I believe should be featured not at all at Amren – not because it isn’t important, but because the manner it is presented at that site is as factually incorrect, anti-White HBD pseudoscience. A healthy portion of the readership, however, want more of that nonsense, although a fraction do want less (good sense!).  I think the best author there is Hood; the readership instead picked Taylor (Taylor’s videos are excellent, but Hood is by far the best writer).

Here’s what I want more of: Cretaceous Jones comments  Less of: Engelman.

Behold the Female: Theranos Update, 9/6/16

Pussy pedestalization in business.

Bizarre story; excerpts, emphasis added:


…Elizabeth Holmes realized that she had no other choice. She finally had to address her employees at Theranos, the blood-testing start-up that she had founded as a 19-year-old Stanford dropout, which was now valued at some $9 billion. Two days earlier, a damning report published in The Wall Street Journal had alleged that the company was, in effect, a sham—that its vaunted core technology was actually faulty and that Theranos administered almost all of its blood tests using competitors’ equipment. 

There was also an uncomfortable chill in the room. At Theranos, Holmes preferred that the temperature be maintained in the mid-60s, which facilitated her preferred daily uniform of a black turtleneck with a puffy black vest…. 

One of the only journalists who seemed unimpressed by this narrative was John Carreyrou, a recalcitrant health-care reporter from The Wall Street Journal. Carreyrou came away from The New Yorker story surprised by Theranos’s secrecy—such behavior was to be expected at a tech company but not a medical operation. Moreover, he was also struck by Holmes’s limited ability to explain how it all worked. When The New Yorker reporter asked about Theranos’s technology, she responded, somewhat cryptically, “a chemistry is performed so that a chemical reaction occurs and generates a signal from the chemical interaction with the sample, which is translated into a result, which is then reviewed by certified laboratory personnel.” 

But no scientist could credibly vouch for Theranos. Under Holmes’s direction, the secretive company had barred other scientists from writing peer-review papers on its technology. 

Absent a plan, Holmes embarked on a familiar course—she doubled down on her narrative. She left the war room for her car—she is often surrounded by her security detail, which sometimes numbers as many as four men, who (for safety reasons) refer to the young C.E.O. as “Eagle 1”—and headed to the airport. (She has been known to fly alone on a $6.5 million Gulfstream G150.) 

Holmes, who talks slowly and deliberately, and blinks with alarming irregularity, replied with a variation of a line from Jobs. “This is what happens when you work to change things,” she said, her long blond hair tousled, her smile amplified by red lipstick. “First they think you’re crazy, then they fight you, and then, all of a sudden, you change the world.” When Cramer asked Holmes for a terse true-or-false answer about an accusation in the article, she replied with a meandering 198-word retort. 

When Elizabeth Holmes emerged on the tech scene, around 2003, she had a preternaturally good story. She was a woman. 

…she approached several of her professors at Stanford, according to someone who knew Holmes back then. But most explained to the chemical-engineering major that it was virtually impossible to do so with any real efficacy. “I told her, I don’t think your idea is going to work,” Phyllis Gardner, a professor of medicine at Stanford, said to me, about Holmes’s seminal pitch for Theranos. As Gardner explained, it is impossible to get  precise result from the tip of a finger for most of the tests that Theranos would claim to conduct accurately. 

She took the money on the condition that she would not divulge to investors how her technology actually worked, and that she had final say and control over every aspect of her company. This surreptitiousness scared off some investors. When Google Ventures, which focuses more than 40 percent of its investments on medical technology, tried to perform due diligence on Theranos to weigh an investment, Theranos never responded.

Eventually, Google Ventures sent a venture capitalist to a Theranos Walgreens Wellness Center to take the revolutionary pinprick blood test. As the V.C. sat in a chair and had several large vials of blood drawn from his arm, far more than a pinprick, it became apparent that something was amiss with Theranos’s promise. 

Later that evening, gripped and overwhelmed with worry, Ian Gibbons tried to commit suicide. He was rushed to the hospital. A week later, with his wife by his side, Ian Gibbons died. 

When Rochelle called Holmes’s office to explain what had happened, the secretary was devastated and offered her sincere condolences. She told Rochelle Gibbons that she would let Holmes know immediately. But a few hours later, rather than a condolence message from Holmes, Rochelle instead received a phone call from someone at Theranos demanding that she immediately return any and all confidential Theranos property. 

Holmes had a single enforcer: Sunny Balwani, the company’s president and chief operating officer, until he stepped down in May. Balwani, who had previously worked at Lotus and Microsoft, had no experience in medicine. He was hired in 2009 to focus on e-commerce. Nevertheless, he was soon put in charge of the company’s most secret medical technology. 

According to a number of people with knowledge of the situation, the two had met years before he began at the company, when Holmes took a trip to China after she graduated from high school. The two eventually started dating, numerous people told me, and remained very loyal even after their relationship ended. Among Holmes’s security detail, Balwani was known as “Eagle 2.” 

As Holmes started to assemble her board of directors, she chose a dozen older white men, almost none of whom had a background in anything related to health care. This included former secretary of state Henry Kissinger, former secretary of state George Shultz, former Georgia senator and chairman of the Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn, and William J. Perry, the former defense secretary. (Bill Frist, the former Senate majority leader, and former cardiovascular doctor, was an exception.) “This was a board that was better suited to decide if America should invade Iraq than vet a blood-testing company,” one person said to me. Gibbons told his wife that Holmes commanded their attention masterfully. 

C.M.S. also soon discovered that some of the tests Theranos was performing were so inaccurate that they could leave patients at risk of internal bleeding, or of stroke among those prone to blood clots. The agency found that Theranos appeared to ignore erratic results from its own quality-control checks during a six-month period last year and supplied 81 patients with questionable test results. 

Forbes, clearly embarrassed by its cover story, removed Holmes from its list of “America’s Richest Self-Made Women.” A year earlier, it had estimated her wealth at $4.5 billion.

“Today, Forbes is lowering our estimate of her net worth to nothing,” the editors wrote. 

Holmes may not be prepared to compartmentalize what comes next. When I arrived in Palo Alto in July, I wasn’t the only person setting out to interview anyone associated with Theranos and Holmes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation was, too. When I knocked on a door, I was only a day or two behind F.B.I. agents who were trying to put together a time line of what Holmes knew and when she knew it—adding the most unpredictable twist to a story she could no longer control.


When pondering all of this, keep in mind that (1) Holmes is at the far right edge of the female bell curve for intelligence and competence, and (2) the gamesters tell men that they have to modulate their every word and action to appeal to ditzy female airheads,

The Pile of Excrement That Walks Like a Man

Its…John Derbyshire.

Low-life, filthy scum.


Most of the big Alt-Right names have dined chez Derb at one time or other.


If there is one statement that summarizes why I can never associate myself with the Alt-Right, it’s the sentence reproduced above. Derbyshire is one of the biggest, most execrable pieces of filthy scum in human history, and anyone who willingly socializes with that creature is, in my eyes, not much better. You know, if you roll around in the sewer, you’ll smell like one.

It’s also why there is a strong mood of empiricism, of openness to science, among the Alt-Right. We are strongly disposed to believe our own lying eyes, and the properly replicated, reviewed work of careful scientists…


That’s absolutely laughable. The HBD-Alt Right is a bastion of dogmatic pseudo-science, close minded to real science, as mendacious as the Leftist Establishment. What “properly replicated, careful work” does he refer to? Lynn’s laughable “averaged” “estimates” of IQ, that couldn’t past muster even with a failing student from a freshman biostatistics course.

For an almost equally flagrant display of HBD, here are a couple of different olympiads from recent months.

First, the U.S.A. Math Olympiad for high-schoolers, this year held April 19th and 20th nationwide. Here’s a picture of the 12 top scorers. Here are their names (not necessarily in the order pictured): Ankan Bhattacharya, Ruidi Cao, Hongyi Chen, Jacob Klegar, James Lin, Allen Liu, Junyao Peng, Kevin Ren, Mihir Singhal, Alec Sun, Kevin Sun, Yuan Yao.

Yes, you lowly Whites, bow down before your Asian masters!  Of course, Derbyfilth won’t tell you that one reason why Whites lag behind is that they’ve been completely corrupted by the degenerate culture produced by Derb’s pets, the Jews.