Will America Survive until 2025?

It is always embarrassing when you predict the end of the world, and it does not happen. Here is a 2011 book interview:

What follows is a transcript of an interview conducted by talk radio host James Edwards with Patrick J. Buchanan upon the initial release of his book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? We revisit this conversation because the year in question has now arrived, and many of the concerns raised during the discussion still remain. ...

Edwards: Well, let’s jump right into the thick of it. Do we currently have front-row seats to the end of Western Civilization and culture as we know it?

Buchanan: I believe the answer is yes, from a variety of standpoints. In one chapter, I discuss the “Demographic Winter” of the West. Currently, no Western country has a birth rate among its native-born population that is sufficient for it to sustain itself in any recognizable form by the end of this century.

It is my argument that when Christianity, which was the faith that created the West, when the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, and then the people die. And I think that’s true down through history. And we certainly see that in Europe, for example, which is well advanced ahead of us, where something like one in ten people go to church in Great Britain, I believe. More people attend Muslim mosques on holy days of the week than go to Anglican churches.

So, I think the West was created by this great religion, and that created the magnificent culture of the Middle Ages, out of which came all these great countries, which really dominated the world through the twentieth century, with empires basically dominating every country on earth almost, except for Japan. And now look at where they are. I think you see a civilization basically in retreat. As Toynbee said, “Civilizations die by suicide, not by murder.”

Buchanan correctly identified some trends that continue today.

Are Indians Better than We Are?

The couple of weeks have had political arguments about Indian-Americans replacing Americans.

Indians make more money than Whites in the USA. Indians have taken over many of the USA tech companies, including the CEOs of Google/Alphabet, Microsoft, IBM, Adobe, Micron Technology, Palo Alto Networks, Vimeo. The current world chess champ is Indian, as was the champ in 2000-2002. Vivek Ramaswamy says Americans are lazy, and not as good as Indians. Many are arguing for the H-1B visa program, that mainly brings in Indians.

Rishi Sunak was Prime Minister of Britain, and Indians and Pakis have taken over London. Nikki Haley was considered a frontrunner in the Republican Party, when it was thought that Trump's legal troubles would keep him out.

This is all very commendable, but not to be overstated. Ann Coulter posted an indignant response, where she points out that all those companies were started by White Americans.

Microsoft and Google have been extraordinarily profitable under Indian management, but there has also been a notable lack of innovative new products. They are mainly cashing in on past innovations, and market trends in their favor.

There are also thousands of Chinese engineers in Silicon Valley. They are also well-behaved and makes lots of money. They come in on several visa programs:

You thought the H-1B visa was bad? Wait until you hear about the largest guest worker program killing jobs for new American college grads—the Optional Practical Training (OPT):
• No caps
• Employers get payroll tax exemptions
• No wage requirements ...

The new OPT program, called STEM-OPT, allowed international students with STEM degrees to extend their OPT from 1 year to 29 months. This extension gave them more time to work in the U.S. and provided employers with a new pipeline for cheaper compliant labor.

After STEM-OPT was introduced, the number of international students, particularly from India and China, skyrocketed.

There are a lot of Chinese engineers on the forefront of AI, and doing cutting edge work in other fields. The stereotype is that they are smart, ambitious, hard-working, and ethnocentric.

The stereotype of Indians is quite a bit different. They are much more tribal than the Chinese. That seems impossible, but they are. They are not the geniuses like the Chinese. They are schemers who take credit for the work of others. They hire their own kind, and get management jobs.

These are just generalities, of course. People are saying that we need thousands of H-1B Indians to keep Silicon Valley running. It is just a lie. Every one of those jobs can be better done by an American.

The NY Times reported in 2020, based on newly released tapes:

In his reply to Nixon, Kissinger explained: “They (Indians) are superb flatterers, Mr President. They are masters at flattery. They are masters at subtle flattery. That’s how they survived 600 years. They suck up – their great skill is to suck up to people in key positions.”

Kissinger continued: “The most sexless, nothing, these people. I mean, people say, what about the Black Africans? Well, you can see something, the vitality there, I mean they have a little animal-like charm, but God, those Indians, ack, pathetic. Uch.” ...

A few days later, on November 12, 1971, ... Nixon blurted: “I don’t know how they reproduce!”

I post this because of the overwhelming public comment that Indians are superior to Americans. That is how they justify the H-1B visa program.

Breitbart reports:

Rep. Shri Thanedar, an India-born Democrat from Michigan, is calling America “racist” as the debate over the importation of foreign workers grows.

Thanedar, who was born in Belgaum, Karnataka, India, is taking the “racism” position by claiming America is rife with Hinduphobia, and recently sponsored a resolution in congress to condemn racism in America.

“Racism in America is still alive and well, and we must stand up to it together,” he wrote in a December 30 post on X.

“Just read the replies to any recent post that includes “H-1B” to see the deplorable rhetoric targeting Indian Americans,” he said, adding, “That’s why I introduced a bipartisan resolution condemning all Hinduphobia.”

Thanedar also jumped to his X account and called to expand the H-1B program., writing, “All Americans make America great, including immigrants. We must increase H1B ten fold and eliminate country quotas. Make it easy to check immigration status, give EAD to all green card applicants, and quadruple USCIS staffing budget to expedite legal immigration. This is how you make America the greatest ever.”

So we Americans are all racists unless we agree to fire Americans and replace them with cheap labor imported from India.

Athletic Advantage before Birth

Boys normally get huge athletic advantages over girls at puberty, so many assume that puberty defines the difference. According to this post, the differences start before birth:

Male athletic advantage begins in utero.

Late first-trimester male foetuses already have uniformly higher concentrations of type IIa and IIb muscie fibers across skeletal muscles. This differential in IIa and IIb concentration continues throughout all of life and is one of the major reasons for greater male performance in speed/power (IIb) and speed-endurance (IIa) events.

It’s pretty well documented that elite men’s track records are on average about 10% faster than elite women’s, across essentially all the contested distances. What most people don’t know—but certainly should—is that essentially the same 10% differential obtains between boys’ and girls’ track records, ALL the way down the age groups.

The fastest boys are still faster than the fastest girls, by the same 10ish %, all the way down to the 8-and-under age group. https://www.usatf.org/resources/statistics/records/championship-meet-records/usatf-national-junior-olympic-track-field-champion

(All the boys’ records are clustered in the first half of the page, followed by all the girls’ records in the second half. The easiest way to compare them is to open the same page in two tabs, shrink each tab to half-screen height, stack the two tabs on top of each other and then navigate to N year old boys’ records in one tab and N year old girls’ records in the other.)

Moreover.
Almost all joint angles differ on average between the sexes, with these differences already being well established between male and female foetuses (relevant papers will appear under the area of forensic fetal osteology

One of the most consequential differences is in the “Q angle” or “quadriceps angle” between each femur and the pelvis. The Q angle in women and girls averages about 2x as far from the vertical as in men—so that female legs in standard gait are angled inwards from the hips, with female footfalls from both feet almost in single file. Male hips are narrower on average, with male legs closer to vertical and male footprints generally in two easily distinguishable, left and right, tracks. (Please understand “on average” to be attached to each observation in this paragraph.)

The Q-angle differences are hugely significant to athletic performance. Jumping, pushoff and leg pressing power are developed only as vectors perpendicular to the ground, so women’s wider Q-angles reduce their potential jump height, sprint speed and maximum performance in any “closed chain” weight lift (squat, deadlift, clean/jerk/snatch etc). Furthermore, the stresses exerted along the residual (parallel to ground) component of female legs place women and girls at far greater risk of ACL tears and related injuries

Another example many readers may at least have noticed—if not considered here—is that women’s elbows typically hyperextend a few degrees beyond straight (https://musculoskeletalkey.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/F000067f006-014-9781455709779.jpg) and are deflected a few degrees laterally (https://musculoskeletalkey.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/F000067f006-002-9781455709779.jpg).

These two types of deflection of women’s arms away from straight—as opposed to male arms, which are quite close to perfectly straight at full extension—is the most important reason by far behind the almost unfathomable sex differences in punching power (men punch 263% as hard as women of similar size and height). The same female hyperextension and deflection is the reason why girls and women hold and bow violins differently, with different types of chin rests needed even by very young girls and boys.

ALL of the differences mentioned in this post exist systemically between the sexes not “from puberty”, not even “from birth”, but from long, long BEFORE birth. Every single one of them is already a statistically significant distinction between male and female foetuses by the end of the FIRST TRIMESTER of pregnancy.

Sports and other pursuits of physical performance just need to be sex-segregated, at all ages, period. This is not complicated, nor is it an issue with two sides or with ‘nuances’ or ‘subtleties’—let alone a ‘human rights’ issue (a phrase that in the 2020s is guaranteed NOT to have anything to do with actual human rights).

This is for those who say that sports can be made more fair by controlling for sex differences. I am not arguing for that. Sex-segregated sports would make sense even if there were no sex-based advantages.

Winning Isn't Normal

A famous Keith Bell speech with that title has been essentially ruled in the public domain in an odd opinion. So I could quote it in full, but instead I have asked AI to rewrite it for me:

Victory is rare. Not because victory is wrong, but because by its very nature, it belongs to the few.

Think about it - in any competition, there's only one champion. Whether there are ten competitors or ten thousand, a single person or team claims the prize.

Because victory is extraordinary, it demands extraordinary measures.

To become a champion, you must transcend the ordinary. The masses don't reach the summit. You must dare to be different, to stand apart.

Your choices must reflect uncommon dedication. You must cherish success more deeply than others. You must hunger for it more intensely. Remember this crucial truth: this hunger isn't some mystical gift - it's a conscious choice you make every day. And you must make that choice your compass.

You can't follow the standard training regimen. You must train harder and smarter than the rest.

Your words, thoughts, and actions can't mirror the majority. You can't simply follow the current, do what's expected, or chase what's trendy. You must be willing to chart your own course and consistently choose the path of excellence. The path to victory may be solitary and challenging, but that's precisely the point - because victory belongs to those who dare to be extraordinary.

Everyone Believes in Free Will

Noam Chomsky argues that 100% of humans act as if they have free will. Some scholars deny it, but it is better to judge peoples' beliefs by how they hehave, rather than what they say. (Apparently extracted from this longer interview.)

I think that's right, but for the possible exception of people like Sam Harris, who took a lot of psychedelic drugs and claims to not have any feeling of free will. Sometimes he talks about politics, and seems to have no voluntary control over his opinions. On the other hand, he seems to like meditation because it lets him imagine that he has free will.

His New Year's Message argues that the Apocalypse is near, as evidenced by the likelihood that the J6 protesters would have hanged Mike Pence, if they had the chance. No, I do not believe that. They were unarmed, and did not appear to want to harm anyone. Some did use force to get into the Capitol building, but only to protest a defective electoral system.

Chomsky says science cannot answer whether we have free will. I think that is correct. Opinions about free will today are not much different from those of ancient Greek philosophers.

He says it is puzzling how smart people can act as if they have free will, and yet deny it.

Chomsky is not a mind-body dualist, and says that there must be a mechanical explanation for whatever the mind is doing, but free will might be beyond our understanding.

I guess his point is that he believes in free will, but leaves open the possibility that there is no free will, but it is a mysterious limitation of the human brain that we have to believe in it anyway.

For a contrary view, Robert Sapolsky argues against free will. He says that if you really had free will, you would be able to somehow show that your decisions were independent of the socio-economic status of your parents, and everything else that may have influenced your past and brain. He denies this, so he says that it makes no sense to reward or punish anyone for anything. He rejects our criminal justice system, as well as everyone else that keeps our society orderly.

He seems sincere, but he also appears to be trying to convince us that he is right. Why bother, if we have no free will? So I think Chomsky is right, and Sapolsky behaves as if he has free will, in spite of everything he says.

Evolutionist Jerry Coyne denies free will in humans, and in other life as well

This is the third and last of a series of posts on the misguided concept of “agency and purpose in biology,” which one can take as the statement that “organisms have goals, and guide their own development and evolution towards those goals”.

He goes on to denounce research in the subject, as an unscientific waste of money. He does not quite say it, but he appears to believe that only a religious bigot would think anything so silly.

I do not know whether dogs have goals. I am just confident that I have free will; that most humans say they have free will; that all humans act as if they have free will, at least occasionally; and possibly some people like Harris, Sapolsky, and maybe some schizophrenics do not.

We Value Dogs, then Cats, then Humans

California made it hard to kill mountain lions, and now there is an overpopulation of them.

The NY Times had a scary story about one mauling two big boys, and killing one of them. Note that they will shoot a lion to save a dog, but not a person.

The deputies spotted the drag trail through the brush and followed it to the cat, still crouched over Taylen’s body. They shot at the ground to scare the lion away. Instead it rushed the deputies, who again tried another warning barrage. ...

Eventually, the cat jumped down and went after the dogs, and Chandler had no choice but to shoot.

This is more evidence of how California is screwed up. If it repealed all its mountain lions laws, everyone would be fine.

Here are some new California laws:

SB 450 removes specific zoning restrictions, simplifying the process for homeowners to divide their properties into up to four separate units.

AB 413, commonly referred to as the "daylighting" law, will change the way people park their cars. From January 1, California residents will no longer be allowed to park a vehicle within 20 feet of any unmarked or marked crosswalk or 15 feet of any crosswalk where a curb extension is present.

SB 1100 will make it illegal for a job posting to require applicants to have a valid driver's license.

AB 1955 prohibits school districts from implementing policies that require educators to inform parents if students identify as transgender or request to use a different name.

AB 1821 mandates that California public schools teach about the impact of the Mission Period and Gold Rush on California Native Americans.

AB 1780 bans legacy admissions at colleges receiving state funding.

SB 729 mandates insurance coverage for fertility services including IVF, expanding access to include LGBTQ+ families.

So if I am hiring a driver, I cannot require a drivers license.

What I learned in 2024

I sometimes end the year by saying what I learned.

The biggest story of the years was the Donald Trump comeback.

The most amazing thing to me was how many or most of our leading intellectuals, influencers, and power brokers could line behind Pres. Joe Biden, who lacked the necessary mental capacity, and then Kamala Harris, who was even worse.

The American Presidency is the world't most important job, and Harris did not have any of the necessary prerequisites and skills. And yet she was praised as if she were the best candidate ever.

It appeared that they favored her because she checked some DEI boxes, and nobody really expected her to be competent, as she would just be a puppet.

Ultimately the voters saw through this, and voted to return to the normalcy of the Trump 45 Presidency.

Update: To see how warped the Democrats are, see Greenwald on Liz Cheney. Also here. She was one of the most hated Republicans in the USA, until she went negative on Trump. Now Biden is giving her a medal, and other Democrats and Leftists are praising her.

All the Top Movies were Sequels

Hollywood had a good year, and is fully recovered from covid. Here are the top ten movies in 2024, by gross revenue:

10. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice
9. Venom: The Last Dance
8. Kung Fu Panda 4
7. Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire
6. Wicked
5. Dune: Part Two
4. Moana 2
3. Despicable Me 4
2. Deadpool & Wolverine
1. Inside Out 2

They are all sequels. Except for Wicked, which is a remake of a stage play that was a prequel to The Wizard of Oz.

In other words, movies make money by recycling old ideas.

It is only going to get worse. Movies of the future will probably be made by AI, after training on the movies of the past. Everything will be derivative.

Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Russell Brand addresses the issue in a podcast.

The experts all say that the vaccines do not cause autism, and they are probably correct. However, according to evidence on the podcast, the matter was not even studied to get vaccine approvals, and we do not have the research to settle the matter.

Everyone was told to get covid shots to reduce the spread of that disease, but no one ever tested whether the vaccines reduce the spread of disease. The tests showed that the vaccines were sufficiently safe, and effective at reducing death, for experimental use.

There are a lot of unanswered questions about a lot of medicines. These issues only get nasty when the medicines are mandated. In most cases, there is no need for the mandates.

The High School Bully was the Good Guy

Sometimes I see a contrarian post that makes me think.

Found this online:

Adulthood is realizing the high school bully is the good guy

He served as a bulwark against degenerate antisocial behaviors and enforced normality.

Maybe all those school anti-bullying campaigns have made society worse. The teachers and counselors are the new bullies.

Maybe you think that we should not have social norms, or that we should not enforce them. Well, we cannot have a society without norms, and we cannot have norms without enforcement.

Atheists who Hate Binary Sex

I tried to follow the atheist attacks on biologists, but I see no merit to them.

The atheists hold themselves out as scientific, rational, and objective, but they have no substantive rebuttal to biologists who say human sex is binary.

Here is a weak attempt, from a 2018 Evolution Society letter:

Variation in biological sex and in gendered expression has been well documented in many species, including humans, through hundreds of scientific articles. Such variation is observed at both the genetic level and at the individual level (including hormone levels, secondary sexual characteristics, as well as genital morphology). Moreover, models predict that variation should exist within the categories that HHS proposes as “male” and “female”, indicating that sex should be more accurately viewed as a continuum.* Indeed, experiments in other organisms have confirmed that variation in traits associated with sex is more extensive than for many other traits.

*Here we are speaking of the multi-dimensional aspects that underlie male-ness and female-ness, including hormones, physiology, morphology, development, and genetic aspects. We acknowledge that many of these aspects are bimodal. Furthermore, some of these aspects are discrete categories (e.g., XX/XY, SRY presence/absence, gamete size, sperm production vs egg production, presence/absence of certain genitalia), but these categories don’t always align within individuals, are not always binary, and should be irrelevant to the determination of a person’s legal rights and freedoms.

If you read this carefully, it acknowledges that several sex definitions can be given, such as XX/XY, SRY, or gamete size. The gripes are that (1) these definitions do not always align; (2) they may not be binary in theoretical models; and (3) they should not affect legal rights.

Even if there are peculiarities in one-in-a-million freaks, or in mathematical models, they have almost nothing to do with current transgender issues. Nearly all trans people are unambiguously one sex, and then acting as another.

So what is going on here? Why would science advocates be so vigorously against good science?

I see two explantions. First, they are radical leftists who want to dismantle sex roles.

Second, they hate Christian nationalists most of all, and Christians line up against transgenderism, so their tribal loyalty is with the opposing view.

Atheist Biologist Canceled by Religion Haters

Biology prof. Jerry Coyne writes:

I’m not only a member and supporter of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, but am also on its Honorary Board. Thus I was doubly distressed when I saw the post below on their website Freethought Now!, a post that completely ignores the widely-accepted biological definition of a woman—one based on the possession of a reproductive apparatus evolved to produce large immobile gametes—in favor of a definition based on self-identification.

So he wrote an explanation of how mammalian sex works, for their site.

His essay has been deleted, as inconsistent with FFRF LGBTQIA goals.

Coyne wrote a whole book on his atheist beliefs, and is firmly anti-religion. But many of the atheist/humanist/skeptic organizations have been taken over by leftist sex advocates. They say that statements like "there are only two sexes" are driven by religious bigotry, and the best way to oppose religion is to promote transgenderism.

This means censoring Coyne's discussion of biological facts.

Religious folks are sometimes perceived as intolerant, anti-science, and aggressively unreasonable. However the FFRF and the trans activists are worse than any religious folks I know.

Update: Coyne comments:

the FFRF has a remarkable ability to place any kind of antiwoke ideology under the rubric of “Christian nationalism.” That’s why I wrote in my now-expunged piece, “As a liberal atheist, I am about as far from Christian nationalism as one can get!” ...

But it’s the last six paragraphs of the FFRF’s post where they explain why they took down my piece. It is because it caused “distress” and “did not reflect [the FFRF’s] values or principles.” I’m not sure what values or principles my piece failed to reflect. ...

they will not allow free and civil discussion about an article that they published, an article that concludes by saying, “A woman is whoever she says she is.” If that is not a statement ripe for discussion, then what is?

Just to give both sides, here is a criticism on an atheism site:

If you believe gender-related issues are tangential to atheism, I assure you that religious conservatives believe the topic is perfectly intertwined with their faith. Just as they used religion to fight marriage equality and abortion rights, they’re using the Book of Genesis in defense of their anti-trans beliefs. If you don’t want religion dictating our laws, and you believe LGBTQ people deserve civil rights, then you understand why these are issues atheist activists ought to care about.

And yet some prominent figures in our loose movement have spent years arguing the opposite, allowing white evangelicals to control the debate on LGBTQ rights — and often taking their side. Jerry Coyne, author of Why Evolution is True and Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible, is another one of those atheists who has spent years spreading anti-trans rhetoric on his website. His blog is now mostly a cesspool of blockquotes from his favorite conservative writers. A deep dive through his “sex and gender” posts will rid you of any respect you may have had for him. (Coyne gave a similar anti-trans talk at the Center For Inquiry’s CSICon in October. Dr. Steven Novella, who spoke at the same event, rebutted it here.)

Coyne is not a religious or evangelical conservative. He is a leftist Jewish atheist biologist Trump-hater. He is also attacked at the Reddit atheism forum.

Update: Coyne resigned, and so did Prof. Steve Pinker

From: Pinker, Steven
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2024 11:49 AM
Subject: resignation

Dear Annie Laurie and Dan,

With sadness, I resign from my positions as Honorary President and member of the Honorary Board of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. The reason is obvious: your decision, announced yesterday, to censor an article by fellow Board member Jerry Coyne, and to slander him as an opponent of LGBTQIA+ rights.

My letter to you last November (reproduced below) explains why I think these are grave errors. With this action, the Foundation is no longer a defender of freedom from religion but the imposer of a new religion, complete with dogma, blasphemy, and heretics. It has turned its back on reason: if your readers “wrongfully perceive” the opposite of a clear statement that you support the expression of contesting opinions, the appropriate response is to stand by your statement, not ratify their error.

This was inevitable. I watched a FFRF video several months ago discussing political action, and they spent all their time talking about plans to pack the US Supreme Court with more leftists.

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has also resigned. The Friendly Atheist blogger writes:

Good riddance. It’s always nice when the trash takes itself out. I urge FFRF to replace them with people who advance their cause instead of setting it back.

The trans activists regularly amaze me with how unreasonable they are. Read their opinions for yourself.

Racial Differences are Adaptive

It is funny to see scholars dance around racial issues, trying not to offend anyone.

Interview:

Alexander Rosenberg is an American philosopher and novelist. He is the R. Taylor Cole Professor of Philosophy at Duke University with secondary appointments in the biology and political science departments. He is also co-director of Duke’s Center for the Philosophy of Biology. ...

[Q]skin color 5:15 is is one characteristic the question is 5:17 is there a a constellation of of uh of 5:21 characteristics that together make up 5:24 differential racial groups?

[A]simple answer 5:26 to that is no.

This is after explaining that human differences in skin color and lactose tolerance are adaptive.

The fact is that DNA tests can identify a person's race, and it is reliably similar to how the person self-identifies, and is identified as others. So plainly there is a constellation of characteristics that identify race.

He tries to imply that the science of racial characheristics is disproved by skin color being adaptive. But evolution teaches that nearly all life characteristics are heritable, and adaptive.

what we 1:09 as consumers of biology have learned us 1:12 philosophers is that molecular biology 1:14 and evolutionary molecular biology 1:17 teaches us that um there's almost no 1:21 scope in fact no scope I'd say uh in 1:24 explanation of interesting features of 1:28 uh human population ations that require 1:32 or even aduce the concept of race what 1:36 we've learned from particularly the 1:38 sequencing of Neanderthal genes and 1:41 human genes across the planet uh is the 1:46 remarkable homogeneity of uh human 1:51 genetic inheritance and the complete 1:53 absence of systematic differences that 1:56 have any material reflection in um uh 2:01 social behavior human institutions uh or 2:04 even our adaptation to our environment

They certainly found systematic differences. Europeans and Asians have Neanderthal genes, while Africans do not. Is that difference reflected in social behavior? That is hard to answer.

[Q] let me get 7:05 practical in the question of uh of race 7:08 because it it it it feels better to have 7:12 no real to have race not being grounded 7:16 in reality it feels better now that is U 7:20 that's that's that's an emotion we 7:21 should be aware of and I think that's a 7:23 good emotion um but that doesn't make it 7:26 right. what makes it right is the what is 7:29 is real in terms of the molecular 7:31 biology and how it works

The interview goes on to give examples of racial differences in medicine.

[A] there are of course natural 8:54 bell-shape Curves in the distribution of 8:57 of all traits in various populations 9:00 are longterm environmental 9:03 factors that will tend to shape certain 9:07 genes as more prevalent in some 9:09 communities than others. so sickle cell 9:11 disease is a perfect example of 9:13 something that's characteristic of 9:16 African 9:18 Americans okay uh carried over from uh 9:22 uh the middle passage from from Africa 9:26 okay but these kind of traits do not 9:28 reflect anything distinctive of races

So the disease is characteristic of one race, but not something distinctive?

He is really trying hard to give the answers that feel better.

Neanderthals survived several Ice Ages, and they must have developed traits to help them survive. It is plausible that some of those traits are reflected in genes that are still inherited today.

Indefinitely Blocked from Wikipedia

I have received an indefinite block on Wikipedia. I appealed, with no success.

My main offense was that in a discussion of Leo Frank, who was lynched a century ago in Georgia, I expressed the opinion that there was no consensus that he was innocent. To support this, I said to just google it.

This infuriated some Wikipedia editors because googling it turns up a web site maintained by some disreputable folks, and Wikipedia refuses to link to that site.

It is not just disreputable people who are unconvinced of his innocence. Georgia officials have repeatedly been asked to pardon him postumously, and have refused to do it.

I am baffled that I would be kicked out over such an obscure issue. Wikipedia has hundreds of articles that are much more contentious.

Yes, he was only Jew ever lynched, and it appears that he was framed by a Black man. It is not clear whether his Jewishness worked for him or against him, and not clear what really happened. His story was instrumental in the founding of the Anti-Defamation League.

The editors who banned me also doxed me, and complained about my relatives and opinions on this blog.

Wikipedia is currently fundraising, but not for its server expenses. The NY Post reports:

Elon Musk urged his supporters not to donate to the nonprofit that runs Wikipedia after the organization budgeted more than $50 million to spend on controversial diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

“Stop donating to Wokepedia until they restore balance to their editing authority,” Musk wrote Tuesday on X, where he has nearly 210 million followers.

Running its computer servers is only a couple of million dollars year.

Humanity is in Genetic Decline

New paper:

Fitness, Mutational Load, and Eugenics
Matthew J. Maxwell

In 2016 geneticist Michael Lynch published a perspective in Genetics arguing that human physical and mental performance is declining at a rate of 1% per generation (Lynch 2016a). ... because medical interventions, such as “surgical procedures, pharmaceuticals, nutritional supplements, and physical and psychiatric therapies” have mitigated the effects of selection on “bad genes,” the incidence of deleterious mutations (mutational load) in the human population has, and will continue, to rise.

Lynch is not a fringe figure in the genetics community. He is former president of the Genetics Society of America, ...

The paper says this would lead to eugenics, and he is against that. He also disagrees with the reasoning.

Lynch avoided a policy recommendation:

What will it take to promote serious discourse on the slowly emerging, long-term negative consequences of policies jointly promoted by political, social, and religious factors? Should such a discussion even be pursued or should the process of accelerated genetic change simply be allowed to run its course — a slow walk down the path to what Hamilton (2001) called ‘the great Planetary Hospital’?”

No serious discourse is likely. I do not know what it would take.

Genealogy of Jesus

Peter Wehner writes in a NY Times op-ed:

One of the forgotten facts of the story of Jesus’ life is that he came from a profoundly dysfunctional family. ...

the pastor of the church, took as his text the first 17 verses of the Gospel of Matthew, known as the genealogy of Jesus. Those verses, a long list of names that ties one generation to another, are often skipped over in favor of the story of Jesus’ birth. To the degree that they have any meaning at all, it’s usually because for Christians it establishes Jesus as the heir to the promises God made to Abraham and David.

But as the pastor pointed out, Jesus came down to us through broken families: “one generation begetting brokenness of another generation begetting brokenness of another generation begetting brokenness of another generation.” There were murderers, adulterers, prostitutes and people who committed incest, liars, schemers and idolaters.

No, this is not important. The biblical Genealogy of Jesus is indeed confusing, and there are apparent inconsistencies.

This would only matter for claiming some Jewish authority, but Christians do not care about that.

Merry Christmas.

Update: Video about another NY Times essay

0:10 DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS, THE "NEW 0:11 YORK TIMES" FEATURED AN 0:13 INTERVIEW WITH PRINCETON 0:15 UNIVERSITY RELIGION PROFESSOR 0:18 ELAINE, IT'S TITLED CONVERSATION 0:20 ABOUT THE VIRGIN BIRTH THAT 0:22 MAYBE WASN'T. 0:22 IT FOCUSES ON PAYPAL'S 0:25 SUGGESTION THAT QUOTE JESUS 0:26 MIGHT HAVE BEEN FATHERED BY A 0:28 ROMAN SOLDIER POSSIBLY BY RAPE.

A priest responds:

1:53 I RECENTLY INTERVIEWED JORDAN 1:54 PETERSON BE. 1:55 HE MAKES AN INTERESTING CASE 1:58 BIBLICAL STORIES WHERE YOU 1:59 BELIEVE OR NOT THEY ARE 2:00 FOUNDATIONAL TO A FREE SOCIETY. 2:02 WHAT WOULD THEIR LOSS MEAN AND 2:04 WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF WHAT THE 2:05 "NEW YORK TIMES" IS DOING? 2:06 >> YEAH, THIS IS AN ASSAULT ON 2:08 THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF WESTERN 2:11 CIVILIZATION, WHICH IS FOUNDED 2:12 ON THE BELIEF IN ONE GOD WHO 2:13 REVEALED HIMSELF IN HIS SON AND 2:15 THAT BROUGHT TO FULFILLMENT THE 2:17 PROCESSES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 2:19 SO, WESTERN HISTORY IS FOUNDED 2:21 ON A GOOD GOD WHO IS JUST 2:25 CREATED MAN WITH A PURPOSE. 2:26 SINFUL MAN IS REDEEMED WHEN HE 2:28 ACTS VITTER YURESLY AND SEEKS 2:29 PARDON FROM GOD. 2:31 THE WHOLE CHRISTIAN ORDER 2:34 DEPENDS ON PERSONAL 2:35 RESPONSIBILITY AND ADHERENCE TO 2:37 THE TRUTH. 2:37 WE BELIEVE THAT GOD IS TRUTH AND 2:39 WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT TRUTH. 2:40 ALL OF THESE HISTORIANS LIKE PAGELS 2:43 WHO TRIED TO DESTROY 2:45 CHRISTIAN FOUNDATIONS BY MAKING 2:46 IT INTO MYTHOLOGY. NO THEY ARE 2:50 AGENTS AND PROPAGANDISTS. 2:52 CERTAINLY NOT HISTORIANS 2:54 AND DON'T DISPLAY THE SKEPTICISM 2:55 OF THEIR OWN THOUGHTS THAT THEY 2:57 WANT US TO DISPLAY ABOUT 2:59 RELIGION. 2:59 WHERE ARE THEY COMING FROM?

Jesus was a Christian, Not a Jew

The way religion is usually taught, Judaism is the oldest religion. Jesus and his disciples were Jews, and Christianity started as a sect of Judaism, until it eventually split into a separate religion.

I think this is backwards.

According to Wikipedia, Rabbinical Judaism did not get going until the 6th century AD. The chief text is the Talmud, and that was written around 500 AD.

The chief Christian text is the Gospels, written closer to 100 AD. Christianity had a well-defined set of beliefs by the time of the Nicene Creed in 325 AD.

You might say that both Jews and Christians revere the Old Testament, and that is considered more Jewish law than Christian law. That is true, but only shows that Judaism and Christianity have some overlap in their origin stories.

But Jesus was born in Bethelem, part of Jewish territory, you may say. Actually the area was under Roman occupation at the time. Paul, who was the chief proponent of Christianity for a while, was believed to have been a Roman citizen. Jesus and the other disciples may well have considered themselves more Roman than Jewish, for all we know.

So it seems to me to make just as much sense to say that Christianity is the oldest religion, and Judaism was a Christian sect that eventually split into a separate religion.

I would prefer to say that Christianity is a rejection of Judaism, but maybe I have it backwards, and it is more accurate to say that Judaism is a rejection of Christianity.

Islam also claims Abrahamic origins, so maybe Moslems think that they are the original true religion, and that Christianity and Judaism are rejections of Islam. Except that I do not think anyone would say that. Christianity and Judaism were well-developed when Mohammad founded Islam.

People say that Jesus was a Jew, but does that mean he had Jewish DNA or he subscribed to Judaism? I do not think that either was well-defined at the time. He had his own set of beliefs. Saying that he was Jew seems like just an anti-Christian thing to say.

Here is another view, from a Palestinian Arab:

Few figures in Middle Eastern or world history are as contested as Jesus of Nazareth. To Christians, Jesus is their Messiah, the Son of God, and God made flesh, the cornerstone of their religion, the world’s largest. During his lifetime, he was a Jewish rabbi living in first-century Roman Judea. ...

Claiming that Jesus was Palestinian is not only anachronistic, it is as inaccurate as asserting that he was Israeli, Ottoman, Byzantine, or a Christian Crusader — since none of these identities existed in his time. Each reflects a later historical period and different sociopolitical realities. Superimposing any of these identities onto Jesus simply does not align with the reality of the first century or describe either his ministry or his followers.

Jesus’s identity was fundamentally Jewish. His teachings, as recorded in the Gospels, were thoroughly rooted in Jewish scripture and traditions and his arguments with the religious leaders of the various Jewish sects of the time — the Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots, and others — were internal debates within Judaism. Jesus lived in a Jewish society, addressed the concerns of his fellow Jews, and was ultimately executed by the Romans as “King of the Jews,” a title that reflects the way in which both his supporters and his enemies viewed him.

I say that saying Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, or a follower of Judaism, is just as anachronistic. Rabbinical Judaism did not exist yet. Jesus did not teach based on the Talmud, and his message was not Jewish.

Merry Christmas.

Society is Divided into Free Men and Slaves

Leftist-atheist-evolutionist Jerry Coyne writes in another of his anti-free will rants:

Legal systems are grounded on the notion that we are morally responsible, but under determinism we’re not. Yes, we can be responsible for an act, but “moral” responsibility is intimately connected with libertarian free will; it’s the idea that we have the ability, at any given time, to act either morally or immorally (or make any any other alternative decision, even if it doesn’t involve morality). Yes, I know there are some who think that the justice system already implicitly accepts determinism, but they are wrong. For if it did, we wouldn’t have any form of retributive punishment, including capital punishment.

As for rewarding good behavior, well, yes, you couldn’t have done otherwise than, say, saved a drowning person. But rewarding people who do good is a spur for other people to do good.  Even if the rewarded people don’t “deserve” plaudits in the sense that their accomplishments didn’t come from LFW, handing out rewards for things that society approves of is simply a good thing to do—for society.

So the criminal does not deserve punishment, but it is good to punish him anyway to deter others. Likewise we reward do-gooders, not because they deserve it, but to provide an incentive for others.

Coyne says he is a hard determinist, who believes that everything people do is pre-determined.

I believet that some people have free will, and some do not. Those without free will are essentially slaves, or robots.

If a wild dog kills and eats your pet rabbit, then the dog does not deserve punishment. However I may forcibly separate it from my other pets. I can do this because I have free will.

If I do not have free will, then there is no sense is telling me what I ought to do, or what is moral to do. I will do whatever I have been programmed to do.

I am trying to make sense out of Coyne's position. I think it would make sense if many heroes and do-gooders have no free will, and our authorities and judges and morally conscious citizens do have free will. Then our leaders can make good decisions, and some citizens will respond to incentives. The others are slaves, and can be thrown in prison if they fail to follow orders.

Okay, but Coyne thinks that it is a law of physics that no one has free will. We are all automatons. It is no use trying to persuade anyone of anything. You cannot make a decision, and you cannot influence anyone else's.

As I always say, “It’s much harder to convince a free-willer of the truth of determinism than to convince a creationist of the truth of evolution.”

Not surprising. Why does he even try, if he is a determinist?

Donald Trump is what he appears

A couple of Leftist Jewish Trump-haters on a podcast:

Sam Harris speaks with Matthew Yglesias about the future of Democratic politics. They discuss where the Democrats went wrong, the failure of identity politics, the Left’s reaction to the Daniel Penny case, what a second Trump term might look like, immigration and the border, gender and racial disparities in crime, wealth inequality, Matthew’s “nine principles for a common sense Democrat comeback,” and other topics.

Matthew Yglesias is a columnist for Bloomberg and author of the newsletter Slow Boring. He has also written for The American Prospect, The Atlantic, and Slate. He co-founded Vox in 2014.

They are a little subdued about Trump, since the election.

A top Yglesias complaint is that Trump is exactly what he appears to be, as opposed to the phoniness of every other major politician.

nobody has ever said to me about Donald Trump -- well if you only like if 30:56 you really knew him you know if you saw what he was like behind closed doors, he's so much more thoughtful, he's so 31:02 much Kinder than he comes across as and you hear that every other president. you know maybe it's BS but like people who 31:09 worked for George W bush people, who worked for Biden, people who worked, you know, people who lost Mitt Romney, Hillary 31:15 Clinton, their closest aides will say you know this person is so great. I I talk to people who work for Trump in his first 31:21 term and they'll say you know no like this guy's totally nuts it's um it's exactly what it seems like and that you 31:28 know that worries me.

He tries to turn this into a negative, but I think that it is a positive. Trump is the most honest and transparent major politician I have seen. If you vote for him, you know what you are voting for.

The podcasts both voted for Harris, but they have no sense of what she stood for. She said whatever her advisors said was politically expedient. She would say that her values had not changed, but what were those values? Nobody knows.

Musk Expresses Support for German Party

The NY Times reports:

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and a close adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, on Friday endorsed Germany’s far-right party, a group with ties to neo-Nazis whose youth wing has been classified as “confirmed extremist” by German domestic intelligence.

“Only the AfD can save Germany,” Mr. Musk posted to X, referring to the anti-immigrant party, the Alternative for Germany, by its German initials. ...

The AfD is polling at 19 percent, and its leaders appeared ready to make the most of the post, apparently hoping that it could help attract more voters and serve as a jumping-off point for communications with the Trump White House.

It is not that extremist, if it is polling at 19%.

Here, terms like "far right" and "extremist" have come to mean opposed to flooding Germany with distinctly non-German immigrants.

The leftist press operates by comparing all their enemis to Hitler. It did not work in the USA 2024 election.

No Science Supports Transgender Athletics

Science popularizers Sabine Hossenfelder and NDT wade into a culture issue:

Neil DeGrasse Tyson made waves recently by giving his take on transgender athletes and how they should be allowed to participate in sports. The discourse around this tiny issue has become increasingly toxic, meaning it’s time for me to talk about it...

They act as if some scientific research into hormones is going to make athletic competitions more fair.

6:11 The problem with treating trans women as female athletes, on the other hand, 6:16 is that at the moment it’s unclear how to do it well. So I think much of the disagreement you see 6:22 comes from the clash between the question of how do we deal with trans athletes NOW 6:30 and the question of how we should ideally deal with them one day.

There is no way to do it well, and no research is going to provide a way.

They both acknowledge that all athletic competitions are unfair in the sense that some athletes have superior talent, strength, training, perseverence, etc. That is a feature, not a bug. Competitions is supposed to bring out the best.

Friendly golf games have handicaps that supposedly let players with different skills compete. Okay, but handicaps are not used in the big tournements.

The science tells us that mammals are unambiguously divided into males and females. The sexes are immutable. Males have a distinct advantage in most sports.

The human sexes are not just divided by athletic ability, but also by psychological traits and cultural roles. We have girls' sport to give opportunities to girls, and not to approximate scientific fairness.

Usually Tyson and Hossenfelder stick to their areas of expertise, but they have waded into the culture wars.

Apparently the respectable liberal prevailing opinion is that if a boy identifies as a girl, and if he is medically treated to diminish his masculine abilities, then the compassionate thing is to let him compete with the girls. But it ruins the whole idea of girls' sports. It is harmful to the girls, and harmful to the boy. Some European countries have quit doing these treatments on minors, because of the obvious harm and the lack of any good evidence of benefit.

Kamala Harris ran for President under a transgender platform. It was probably the issue she most identified with, besides abortion and open borders. I am expected some changes, now that she lost.

Science and Religious Dogmatism

Matías Cabello writes in a new paper:

The greatest myth in the history of science and religion holds that they have been in a state of constant conflict. — Numbers (2009, p.1)

Is the science-based world we live in today the result of rationalism displacing religious dogmatism— the triumph of reason over faith, the victory of science over religion? This interpretation took root during the Enlightenment and remains popular among many in secular society, who see clear paral- lels between current evangelical resistance to Darwinism and Galileo’s condemnation by the Roman Inquisition in 1633 for holding that the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Today’s leading experts on the subject, however, tend to either strongly qualify or outright deny the notion that religion and science were historically in conflict. Neither did science undermine religion (Brooke, 2009), experts claim, nor has religion typically impeded scientific growth (Harrison, 2015). The rise of Christianity did not cause the demise of classical philosophy (Lindberg, 2009); the Medieval Church did not suppress the growth of science (Shank, 2009); and there was “no such thing as a [systematic] conflict between science and religion” in the times of Galileo (Shapin, 1998). His trial by the Inquisition is instead seen as a rare exception to an otherwise constructive relationship between the Church and science, evidenced by countless cases of scientists who were deeply religious, who were religiously inspired to do science, who were directly funded by the Church, or who owe their scientific productivity to the vast network of early modern cultivated clergymen (Brooke, 1991, Shapin, 1998, Harrison, 1998, Osler, 2001, Feingold, 2003, and Hannam, 2011, among many others). ...

The consensus is clear: “as a theory believed by working historians, the conflict hypothesis is dead” (Hannam, 2009); it “has now been thoroughly debunked,” as a “mixture of exaggerations, dishonest emphases, misunderstandings, and outright lies” (Hutchings and Ungureanu, 2022, p. 15); “erected on insubstantial foundations” (Russell, 2000, p. 15), it is nothing but “the greatest myth in the history of science” (Numbers, 2009, p.1).1

He goes on to argue that Europe had a Christian revival in 1520-1720, and this stalled the progress of science somewhat.

Evolutionist-atheist Jerry Coyne is unconvinced, but has some similar views:

Instead, I’d say that people like Numbers and Ruse adopt the “no conflict” hypothesis because it is more or less a “woke” point of view: it goes along with the virtue-flaunting idea that you can have your Jesus and Darwin, too. You don’t get popular by touting a conflict, as I’ve learned, but people love to hear that you can be religious and also embrace modern science.

Numbers and Ruse are dead, so I don't know about them. But it is bizarre to say European science was held back by Christianity during 1520-1720. That was the time of Copernicus, Tycho, Kepler, Galileo, Boyle, Hooke, Newton, Leibniz, etc. The first great anatomy book was written. Europe lept ahead of the whole world in science.

While people like to point on a dispute between Galileo and the Pope, it did not hurt the progress of science. Galileo continued to get Church sponsorship, and to publish scientific works. No other religion wsa sponsoring scientific works.

Haidt Diagnoses Today's Youth

Bill Gates makes his annual book recommendation, getting this review:

One of his recommended books might be pretty insightful. The Anxious Generation

We have raised a couple generations now that were over parented, protected from adversity while growing, never having a moment to grow, always adults lording over the kids to prevent any problem or harm. Where a mother is arrested for allowing her child to walk without an adult ensuring their safety. Where "free range" children are considered prima facie evidence of a crime and child abuse.

But allowed to watch shemale midget scat pR0n on the Smartphone they got when they turn 5 years old.

So it isn't terribly surprising that young people grow into physical adults, yet stuck in a strange childish funk, and need chemical assistance to deal with their depression. That in recent years, atypical antipsychotics are being normalized.

Life out of balance. Raising children requires two parents, usually one male, and usually one female. Today, the male input is largely subjugated, while the female is elevated. And the epidemic of single female parent households makes the childrearing with no male input at all - no male input wanted.

In a normal situation of bonded parents, the female excels at nurturing and keeping the children alive and healthy, The male provides protection and teaches boundaries that allow the children to become successful adults.

But in today's western world, males are considered useless, and are not needed, and females have the force of law, much of society, and especially media to enforce that. To the point that a growing number of young men are leaving to find mates in other countries where they are not considered the cause of all problems.

Witness the oncoming attacks with me daring to not tow the prevailing party line.

I have a number of friends that partnered with Philippinas, Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, and a couple other nationalities. Not a divorce in the lot, and they treat each other like kings and queens.

Side note: so many American women who don't need a man are enraged by men that they reject leaving to find love elsewhere. You would think they would celebrate the enemy leaving them alone.

Point is, what we are doing is failing terribly.

Even now though, there are some interesting actions. The recent election was decidedly female versus male. The democrats were blindsided that a gynocentric campaign failed to attract males. They were shocked that young men didn't vote en masse for Harris, adding to the landslide that all females were going to vote for her.

They figured that the enemy (read the stereotype old white racist men) were going to vote for orange man, but young men were raised right and would join the curb stomping.

But these young guys, who were told that by virtue of brandishing a penis - they were the enemy, and they were the cause of every problem, and they were the oppressors, started finding it kind of odd that the oppressed victims were better educated, given preference i hiring and promotions, and given rights without responsibilities. So we could have a woman CEO playing victim to young guys who were raised on Ritalin, and living in their parents basement.

Finally, the over reach of sexual harassment has reached comical terms, not to mention a variable thing. Harassment is now determined by how attractive the guy is. Saying that you like a woman's ear rings is sexual harassment. Since it can end a man's career, the only winning move is to not play the game.

So make no mistake, orange man is probably not going to help these young guys very much at all. But they have experienced what Democrats, colleges, the media and the courts have done for some time now. Many of the young guys don't dislike Harris either, they dislike the direction things have taken. And while it isn't popular to note, there are women out in the wild who do not hate men. So the gynocentric campaign managed to blow through almost 2 billion to get landslided in the electoral college.

This is going to take along time to return to any sort of normalcy.

Another similar rant, also influenced by Haidt, is Why Matriarchies Fail.

Did USA Provoke The Ukraine War?

I have the impression that the USA provoked the Ukraine war. Here is a debate on the issue, between experts who know much more than me: Niall Ferguson V.S. Scott Horton: Did The U.S. Provoke The Ukraine War?: ZeroHedge Debate Special.

Daniel Penny, Iconic Roman Hero

Helen Andrews writes in First Things:

Daniel Penny’s Acquittal Is a Win for Civilization ...

The more you looked at him, the more you realized he looked like a specific Roman statue: the Dying Gaul. Same curly hair, sharp nose, prominent chin, mustache, jawline, everything.

The Dying Gaul is famous as a representation of dignity in defeat. ...

Then Donald Trump won the presidency. Suddenly, Daniel Penny’s tribe was a defeated people no more. ...

Is the era of Black Lives Matter over? ...

Despite their loud talk, I expect few riots — but the reason has more to do with internal dynamics on the left. The October 7 attacks by Hamas opened up a rift between the Democratic party’s donors and its activist class. Protests like those of 2020 cost money, and the people who bankrolled that summer are less willing to write checks now that the recipients of their largesse have, in many cases, cheered on the massacre of Israeli civilians.

What is she saying at the end? That wealthy Jews have been financing Black riots, but lost interest when the leftist activists starting celebrating the murder of Israelis? It does appear that Black Lives Matter has peaked.

The Penny prosecutor, Dafna Yoran ( pronounced "urine"), was born and raised in Israel. She is a lesbian who is gay-married to a 'Peruvian pro-Black Lives Matter artist' named Ana De Orbegoso. She is a far-left activist driven by revenge fantasies against "Nazis". During the trial, she called Penny the White man, as she identifies as Jewish non-white.

Unrelated, but see: 9 VOLT | SMOKE DETECTOR HORROR FILM (Trailer, 2024). I think it must be a racist joke, and not a real movie.

Sam Harris Rants Against Christianity

Sam Harris is back on the warpath against Christianity:

If Christianity is right, all other religions are wrong:

Jesus Christ was the Messiah—so the Jews are wrong.
Jesus was divine and resurrected—so the Muslims are wrong (“Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger—they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them.” Qur’an, 4:157).
There is only one God—so the Hindus are wrong.

But, of course, the Christians have no better reason to think they’re right than Jews, Muslims, or Hindus do.

Christianity has built great civilizations. Not those other religions. So yes, Christians do have reason to think that they are more right.

And religion often inspires people to do bad things that they would not otherwise do. For instance, at this very moment in Syria and Iraq, perfectly ordinary Shia and Sunni Muslims can be found drilling holes into each other’s skulls with power tools. What are the chances they would be doing this without the “benefit” of their incompatible religious beliefs and identities?

Again, this is an argument that Christianity is better than Islam.

While I have spent a fair amount of time thinking about the brain, I do not think that the reducibility of consciousness to unconscious information processing has been established. It may be that the very concepts of mind and matter are fundamentally misleading us.

Interesting admission. He almost concedes that we might have souls. Odd for such a hard-core religion hater. If we have souls, then how can we address their health, except by religion?

One of the greatest problems with religion is that it is built, to a remarkable degree, upon lies. Mommy claims to know that Granny went straight to heaven after she died. But Mommy doesn’t actually know this. The truth is that, while Mommy may be honest on every other topic, in this instance, she doesn’t want to distinguish what she really knows (i.e. what she has good reasons to believe) from (1) what she wants to be true or (2) what will keep her children from being too sad in Granny’s absence. So Mommy is lying—either to herself or to her kids—and we’ve all agreed not to talk about it. Rather than learn how to grieve, we learn to lie to ourselves, or to those we love.

So maybe religious folks tell themselves convenient lies. But this is coming from Harris who wrote a whole book against free will, and arguing that we are all pre-programmed automatons. If so, no one chooses what to believe. Truth is not a requirement. We just believe what we are programmed to believe, whether true or not.

Harris is some sort of Jewish Atheist Leftist Buddhist Trump-hater. He lacks the free will to make an informed judgment on Trump, but regularly posts stupid rants against him anyway. He says that he does not even have a feeling of free will. It is all based on his DNA or whatever he thinks is determinitive.

Here is his moral gripe with Christianity.

The truth is that even with Jesus holding forth in defense of the poor, the meek, and the persecuted, the Bible basically condones slavery. As I argued in Letter to a Christian Nation, the slaveholders of the South were on the winning side of a theological argument — and they knew it.

Christians believe in free will, and freedom of the human spirit. The truth will set you free. Those without free will are the real slaves.

Elle Silver on Divorcing her Husband

I stumbled on the Elle Silver blog. Essays about how she divorced her busband, and is happy about it, except for how her life is much worse as a result. Just read the headlines. The rest is not worth it.

Court Voids NASDAQ DEI Rules

Maybe we have seen peak DEI.

News:

A federal appeals court struck down Nasdaq (^IXIC) rules designed to encourage more diverse company boards, the latest defeat for DEI policies across corporate America.

The decision handed down by nine judges for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans concluded that the Securities and Exchange Commission should not have approved the Nasdaq rules in 2021.

These rules would have required the thousands of companies listed on the tech-heavy exchange to have at least one person who self-identified as female on their board, or explain why there was not one, along with at least one person who self-identified as either from a racial minority or as LGBTQ. ...

"We hold … that the diversity rules cannot be squared with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934," they said in the 9-8 ruling.

The SEC, they added, failed to establish that the diversity disclosure rules were related to the purpose of the Exchange Act — which "exists primarily to protect investors and the macroeconomy from speculative, manipulative, and fraudulent practices, and to promote competition in the market for securities transactions."

Christopher F. Rufo has suggestions for Trump to shut down DEI.

Penny is Acquitted

Daniel Penny was acquitted of manslaughter and negligent homicide, in the NYC subway case. He is widely regarded as a hero, but there could be Black Lives Matter riots.

The United Healthcare CEO killer has been caught. No, he is definitely not a hero.

FDR Provoked Pearl Harbor Attack

This article makes a good case that Pres. FDR knew that Japan was oing to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941. Indeed, FDR baited them into it, as an excuse to enter WWII.

This is old news. Most historians agree that FDR was hostile to Japan, at the least.

And yet FDR is portrayed as a great hero.

I just mention this as an example of how the Deep State can lie to us.

Failing the Mirror Self-recognition Test

This is old news. A 2010 story:

The performance of young children on the ‘mirror self-recognition test’ varies hugely across cultures, a new study has shown. This is the test that involves surreptitiously putting a mark on a child’s forehead and then seeing how they react when presented with their mirror image. Attempts by the child to touch or remove the mark are taken as a sign that he or she recognises themselves in the mirror. Studies in the West suggest that around half of all 18-month-olds pass the test, rising to 70 per cent by 24 months. Chimps, orangutans, dolphins and elephants have also been shown to pass the test, and there’s recent debate over whether monkeys can too.

They found that non-western kids do poorly, with kids as old as 6 flunking it in Kenya.

Does this mean that Kenyan IQ is lower than that of chimps and dolphins? No, I don't think so. Interesting anyway.

Jailed for Eating a Cat

The NY Post reports:

A sick Ohio woman who killed and ate a cat was hit with a one-year jail sentence on Monday as a furious judge slammed her for the repulsive stomach-turning act.

“To me, you present quite a danger to our community,” Stark County Common Pleas Judge Frank Forchione told Allexis Ferrell, 27, the Massillon Independent reported.

“This is repulsive to me. I mean, that anyone would do this to an animal. And an animal’s like a child. I don’t know if you understand that or not,” the judge said. “I can’t express the disappointment, shock, disgust that this crime has brought to me.

“This is repulsive to me,” an Ohio judge told Allexis Ferrell as he sentenced her to jail for eating a cat in August. Canton Police Department

“I don’t know what could prompt anyone to want to eat a cat.”

He then sentenced Ferrell, who pleaded guilty to a felony charge of animal cruelty.

I don't know what prompted her to eat a cat, but animals are not like human children, and it is not cruel to kill and eat an animal.

She cannot be deported because she was born in the USA.

Canada to Deport Millions

Canada has been dramatically replacing its population with non-white foreigners, making the Trudeau government extremely unpopular. Now they are realizing the foolishness.

Bloomberg reports:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plan to fix immigration in Canada depends on the biggest exodus of people since at least the 1940s — one that many economists doubt is feasible.

Slamming the brakes on record-setting population growth requires 2.4 million non-permanent residents to leave or change status over the next two years, according to the government’s forecasts, which also see 1.5 million new temporary arrivals during that time. ...

The new plan — in which the overall population is set to slightly shrink, once all factors are considered — represents a sharp reversal from a population boom that strained housing, the job market and public services. Once a proponent of mass migration, Trudeau is backtracking amid souring public opinion on immigration and weak polling numbers for his Liberal Party.

The British government is similarly unpopular for replacing its population. Could Canada, Britain, and the USA all be wising up at the same time? We shall soon see whether they have to guts to do mass deportations.

Also:

Police have carried out dawn raids in several cities in Germany and France in an internationally coordinated operation to smash a network accused of smuggling migrants to Britain in small boats.

While Whites are declining:

The European Union has recorded its lowest number of births in over 60 years, with a dramatic 5.5 per cent decline from the previous year marking the largest annual drop on record.

Yes, I know, the White women can just abort their babies, and replace them with immigrants.

Also in France, the government is unpopular for its immigration policy:

A new poll shows that nearly a majority of French people do not want any immigration at all, both legal and illegal.

The poll from CSA, which was conducted for Europe 1, CNews and the Journal du Dimanche, showed that 48 percent of French people want zero immigrants coming — that means not a single migrant entering French territory.

British Great Replacement was Unforgivable

Britain has had a crazy policy of deliberately importing non-white foreigners to replace its native population. Many of them blamed the European Union, and voted for Brexit to restore national autonomy. But the Conservative government in charge of implementing Brexit dramatically increased the no-white immigration, against the will of the people.

Now the liberal prime minister, with the Nazi-sounding name, seems to admit all of this. From a speech:

This happened by design, not accident.

Policies were reformed…

Deliberately …

To liberalise immigration.

Brexit was used for that purpose…

To turn Britain into a one-nation experiment in open borders…

Global Britain – remember that slogan…

That is what they meant.

A policy with no support… [Political content redacted]

Well that’s unforgivable.

Yes, it is unforgivable.

When they put Brexit on the ballot, they should have given the British another option to stop the immigration

Churchill on Good and Bad Jews

I posted some sharp opinions about whether Winston Churchill can be blamed for WWII. Now I found that he wrote a 1920 essay

Zionism versus Bolshevism

A STRUGGLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE.

SOME people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world. ...

Good and Bad Jews. The conflict between good and evil which proceeds unceasingly in the breast of man nowhere reaches such an intensity as in the Jewish race. The dual nature of mankind is nowhere more strongly or more terribly exemplified. ...

First there are the Jews who, dwelling in every country throughout the world, identify themselves with that country, enter into its national life, and, while adhering faithfully to their own religion, regard themselves as citizens in the fullest sense of the State which has received them. Such a Jew living in England would say, "I am an Englishman practising the Jewish faith." ... The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and useful part in the national life even of Russia. ...

International Jews. In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, ...

Terrorist Jews. There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. ...

A Home for the Jews. Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism, it presents to the Jew a national idea of a commanding character.

I do not know whether these opinions had anything to do with England entering WWII against the Nazi, with post-war treaties, or the creation of Zionist Israel.

For a more modern view comparing Bolsheviks and Nazis, see this movie on X-twitter. I am not endorsing this, as it appears to include some anti-Jewish propaganda.

AP reports:

The U.S. conservative political commentor Candace Owens was refused a visa to enter New Zealand for a speaking engagement because she had been banned from another country, immigration officials said Thursday.

News of the ruling came weeks after neighboring Australia also rejected her visa request, citing remarks in which she denied Nazi medical experimentation on Jews in concentration camps during World War II.

She said that some of the reported experiments were implausible because they had no medical value. I assume that she is wrong about this, but she ought to be able to express her skepticism without having her travel blocked.

John Dean was Wrong about Watergate

New lecture:

Geoffrey Hinton - Will Digital Intelligence Replace Biological Intelligence?

In this profound keynote, Vector co-founder Geoffrey Hinton explores the philosophical implications of artificial intelligence and its potential to surpass human intelligence. Drawing from decades of expertise, Hinton shares his growing concerns about AI's existential risks while examining fundamental questions about consciousness, understanding, and the nature of intelligence itself.

He respond to the AI criticism that LLMs hallucinate, by saying that human memory is just as bad. He gives as an example an analysis of John Dean's Watergate testimony:

John Dean, the former counsel to President Richard Nixon, testified to the Senate Watergate Investigating Committee about conversations that later turned out to have been tape recorded. Comparison of his testimony with the actual transcripts shows systematic distortion at one level of analysis combined with basic accuracy at another. Many of the distortions reflected Dean's own self-image; he tended to recall his role as more central than it really was. Moreover, his memory for even the “gist” of conversations was quite poor except where that gist had been rehearsed in advance or frequently repeated.

Wow. John Dean was the White House lawyer, and he never should have been allowed to testify against Pres. Nixon. But he did, and recited events in extraordinary detail. I did not know that his recollection was mostly wrong.

I had read that the Woodward-Bernstein accounts were mostly wrong, to the extent that facts could be checked.

Evolution and Immigration Denial

Jonatan Pallesen writes:

Many people deny that mass immigration over time will fundamentally change countries.

This is a similar kind of mistake as evolution denial.

One is abowritesut e: volution at the level of a species and one is about evolution at the level of a country.

• Evolution deniers

Evolution deniers accept that "microevolution" happens. They also agree that different species exist. They just don't think that a large number of small mutations over time can lead to a new species.

• Mass immigration impact deniers:

Similarly, mass immigration impact deniers accept that micro changes happen. They acknowledge that individual immigrants can have different cultures and views than the host population on average. They also agree that countries with large differences between them exist. They just don't believe that a large number of immigrants over time can lead to a fundamentally changed country.

Both groups of deniers often demand to be shown direct evidence of transformation in progress. For example, "Show me the monkey turning into a human" or "Show me that California has turned into Mexico." A snapshot may not clearly reveal an ongoing process, but that doesn't mean the process isn't taking place.

In both cases, the evolution has taken place in the past. For example, with the Yamnaya expansion, countries evolved into different societies and cultures. However, since this happened long ago, there is limited evidence illustrating these changes. Similarly, our shared ancestor with chimpanzees evolved into different species, including humans. But since this also occurred long ago, the evidence is limited, allowing evolution deniers to raise questions.

In general, people find it difficult to intuitively understand the impact of many small changes over time. This difficulty, combined with ideological beliefs that lead them to want to deny it, is why many otherwise sensible people deny that evolution takes place.

He has a good point. People can see the small changes, and have trouble seeing the big changes.

A long time ago, people did not care about invasive species, because the immediate effect was small. Or people did not understand the different ecology of different species.

California, Canada, London, Paris, etc. have been transformed into something different. It should be plain for anyone to see.

Skeptics and Rationalists Denying Race and Sex

Philosopher Michael Ruse died recently. He was mainly famous for being on the front lines of the evolution-religion wars, firmly on the side of the evolutionists.

Here is a recent interview, Michael Ruse - Philosophy of Race and Ethnicity, where he argues that racial differences are all cultural:

I think 4:59 what see is it's the there are differences 5:02 but the differences are cultural not 5:05 genetic and so that's why for instance 5:07 it Living in America, I'm very keen on 5:11 programs of diversification and that 5:14 sort of thing. you might have to do this 5:16 but let's make sure that people who are 5:19 not. you know, white Anglo sax Protestants 5:22 are not as it were pushed into the same 5:25 group as the rest. I mean we see this 5:27 don't we say with Catholics think of 5:29 Cath Catholics in the 19th century as we 5:31 go into the 20th century clearly way 5:34 below white Protestants now what this 5:38 because Catholics had some genetic 5:40 defect no or Jews no it was because they 5:44 didn't have the 5:46 opportunities Jews for instance we all 5:49 know how Harvard wouldn't let Jews in. we 5:52 know that we know that so the point is 5:55 what I'm saying is I think that there 5:57 are if you like racial differences. 6:00 clearly some are genetic but I see no 6:02 reason to think that any of these have 6:05 any significant thing on intelligence 6:08 and it's all cultural, we can change it.

This bizarre, as he wrote many books on Darwinian evolution. How would intelligence ever evolve, if it were not inherited in the genes?

Another well-known veteran of the evolutionist-skeptic community is Steven Novella. He also has a long and prolific history of scientific skepticism, rational thinking, and debunking pseudoscience.

Now Novella goes to rationalist meetings denying human sex differences. See When Skeptics Get It Wrong: Debunking The Debunker for a discussion of his errors:

Obviously, Dr Novella’s definitions don’t represent the consensus of biologists. Indeed, they weren’t even written by biologists, and they certainly didn’t come from biology journals. ...

Another interesting (and telling) component here is the number of biologists who are silent on the topic. That alone rings my skeptical alarm bells. Why would biologists be afraid to say sex is NOT binary in the current social climate? ...

Humans are definitely sexually dimorphic, and no one is arguing against that basic biological fact. However, although there are many ways to be male and female, there are still just two sexes.

Thirty years ago these guys help win the wars against Creationism, by arguing science, reason, Evolution, skepticism, and rational thinking. Now they make these leftist arguments that are not based on any science.

The fact is that sex is binary in humans and other mammals. People are either male or female. And nearly all human trait, whether physical, psychological, or behavioral, are heritable, and lead to genetic and racial differences.

These issues are not complicated. Whether Catholics are, on average, higher or lower in intelligence than Protestants, I do not know, but it can be measured. There is evidence that Ashkenazi Jews are of higher intelligence. Some of that is questioned by The myth of Jewish intelligence. I have not examined it myself.

Left-wingers have certain egalitarian goals, and they get upset at the idea of racial, sexual, or genetic differences, even when those differences are plain to see. Apparently those political goals have corrupted the thinking of people who are otherwise advocates of hard science.

The Major Polls were Tilted against Trump

The pollsters seriously underestimated Pres. Trump in 2016 and 2020, and assured us that they had taken corrective measures to avoid that in 2024.

They did it again in 2024. All except Rasmussen. Why?

The NY Times reported a week ago that Trump was confident of winning because his internal polls showing him winning.

Now the Harris campaign admits that her internal polling also show Trump winning the whole way.

Statistician Nate Silver told us that Trump had a 51% chance of winning. Others said this was going to be one of the closest in history. They were way off.

Polls can be wrong, and statistical estimates inaccurate. But it is hard to explain the major pollsters dramatically underestimating Trump in three straight elections, especially when Rasmussen and the private Republican and Democrat polls were getting it right.

Rasmussen Reports posted regular videos throughout the campaign explaining why the other pollsters were underestimating Trump. Maybe he was just lucky. Or maybe he is a better pollster. I think it is more likely that the other pollsters were biased against Trump, and refused to correct their biases even when they are pointed out.

The Lawfare against Trump Backfired

A NY Times law professor op-ed admits:

“our search for political salvation primarily through the law has backfired. To oppose Mr. Trump in his second term, liberals must learn the lesson of this defeat, which is that there is no alternative to persuading our fellow citizens of our beliefs.”

Really? Is that what those Trump prosecutions were all about?

The coalistion of Leftists and Deep State warmongers could not convince their fellow citizens of their beliefs, so their best alternative was to jail Trump?

This was sold to the public by saying that Trump was Hitler, so Hitler-like tactics must be used to destroy him.

Now that the election is over, Trump is being exonerated on all counts.

Pride Flag is now Flag of Canada

News:

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has fined Emo Township for refusing to fly the “Pride Flag” in June 2020.

In a November 20 decision, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal awarded Borderland Pride, a local LGBT activist group, $15,000 from Emo Township and Emo mayor Harold McQuaker after the small Ontario town refused to bend to the demands of LGBT activists and celebrate June as “pride” month.

Europe news:

Over the past three years, more than 1,300 citizens in Germany have faced legal proceedings for allegedly insulting public officials. The surge in cases, particularly under the current coalition government led by the Social Democrats (SPD), Greens, and Free Democrats (FDP), has prompted a nationwide debate over the limits of free speech. ...

One of the most controversial cases involved a 64-year-old pensioner from Bavaria, Stefan Niehoff, whose home was raided by police last week after he posted a meme calling Habeck an “imbecile.”

Geology has a White Supremacist Praxis'

The London Daily Mail reports:

A geography professor at a leading British university has described the study of rocks and the natural world as racist and linked the academic field to 'white supremacy'.

Kathryn Yusoff, who lectures at the prestigious Queen Mary University of London, said that the geology as a subject was 'riven by systematic racism' and influenced heavily by colonialism.

The study of prehistoric life through fossils was also branded as an enabler for racism, with the professor referring to the field of palaeontology as 'pale-ontology'.

Arguing that geology began as a 'colonial practice', Professor Yusoff stated in her book 'Geologic Life' that the extraction of metals such as gold and iron had created hierarchies, pushed materialism, ravaged environments and was the route cause of climate change.

Claiming that 'geology continues to function within a white supremacist praxis', the academic referenced the theft of land, mining and other geological practices as having led to the creation of white supremacy and a resulting 'geotrauma'.

Professor Yusoff's new book focuses on geology between the 17th and 19th centuries and puts forward the notion that non-white people have a closer relationship to land than white people.

'Broadly, black, brown, and indigenous subjects… have an intimacy with the earth that is unknown to the structural position of whiteness,' she wrote.

Ms Yusoff is described as a professor of 'inhuman geography' on the official Queen Mary University website.

Why do White folks put up with this? These professors are teaching falsehoods and hatred.