Saturday, October 21, 2017

China policy may have averted 1 billion people

AAAS Science Mag reports:
A new study of China’s one-child policy is roiling demography, sparking calls for the field’s leading journal to withdraw the paper. The controversy has ignited a debate over scholarly values in a discipline that some say often prioritizes reducing population growth above all else.

Chinese officials have long claimed that the one-child policy — in place from 1980 to 2016 — averted some 400 million births, which they say aided global environmental efforts. Scholars, in turn, have contested that number as flawed. But in a paper published in the journal Demography in August, Daniel Goodkind — an analyst at the U.S. Census Bureau in Suitland, Maryland, who published as an independent researcher — argues that the figure may, in fact, have merit.

By extrapolating from countries that experienced more moderate fertility decline, Goodkind contends that birth-planning policies implemented after 1970 avoided adding between 360 million and 520 million people to China’s population. Because the momentum from that decline will continue into later generations, he suggests, the total avoided population could approach 1 billion by 2060. Some scholars worry such estimates could be used to justify, ex post facto, the policy’s existence, and feel that Goodkind’s criticisms of previous work fall outside the bounds of scholarly decorum.

“For the top journal to publish that paper was quite something,” says Nancy Riley, a demographer ...

Beginning in 2000, an international group of researchers appealed to the Chinese government to relax birth-planning regulations. At the heart of their argument was empirical research debunking the claim of 400 million averted births.
In other words, many researchers are saying that scientific publications should be manipulated to conform to political goals.

There are various political and moral arguments for and against the China 1-child policy. I am not sure what my position on that would have been. But it is a little crazy to say that data and analysis should only be published if it supports one side of the argument.

Friday, October 20, 2017

Who is afraid of Richard Spencer?

Why is anyone afraid of Richard B. Spencer?

I have watched several of his Youtube videos. He does not express radical opinions or make strong arguments. Mostly he makes general and oblique comments about current political events and what he considers the Alt Right movement. He occasionally says he prefers ppl of similar ethnicity to himself, but that is true about most of the world.

What he does do is trigger hatred of white ppl. Spencer does not advocate white supremacy, but the protesters against must give many observers a better argument for white supremacy than anything Spencer would say anyway. The protesters seem like lunatics, fascists, criminals, and undesirables. Spencer seems calm and rational by comparison.

A Martian might conclude that folks like Spencer should be running the country, while the protesters should not be allowed to vote.

I think that the protesters would be much better off ignoring Spencer. Nobody would have heard of him, if it were not for these protests.

Father's nightmare in divorce court

Wonder what family court is like? Paul Schwennesen tells his story, and how fathers are mistreated.

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

CNBC says future holds racial doom

Here is another forbidden truth. CNBC announces:
Market doomsayer Marc "Dr. Doom" Faber has launched a racially charged diatribe in his latest newsletter, alleging that the U.S. is great primarily because it is ruled by white people.

The eccentric Gloom, Boom & Doom report author, who often speaks on CNBC and other financial media, generally forecasting some type of market downturn, focused his latest comments on the racial conflicts happening around the country.

(A CNBC spokesperson said it will not book him in the future.)

"And thank God white people populated America, and not the blacks. Otherwise, the US would look like Zimbabwe, which it might look like one day anyway, but at least America enjoyed 200 years in the economic and political sun under a white majority," he wrote.

"I am not a racist, but the reality — no matter how politically incorrect — needs to be spelled out."
I assume that if CNBC thought that he was wrong, then it would just have another guest to prove him wrong. Not that it would have to do anything, as he did not make the controversial comments on the air.

The guy apparently thinks that racial conflict is increasing, and is bad for the future of America. I guess he is not allowed to say that anymore.

Zimbabwe is a country that went from white rule to black rule, and then to chaos.

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

Why environmentalists avoid population issues

Overpopulation is at the root of most, if not all, environmental problems, from global warming to pollution. Any honest environmentalist would devote most of his efforts to reducing population and immigration.

But the vocal environmentalists are on the Left, and one of them explains:
I’m an environmental journalist, but I never write about overpopulation. Here’s why.
Since you asked (many times).
Updated by David Roberts@drvoxdavid@vox.com Sep 26, 2017

I thought I would explain, once and for all, why I hardly ever talk about population, and why I’m unlikely to in the future. …

When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well. In practice, where you find concern over “population,” you very often find racism, xenophobia, or eugenics lurking in the wings. …

History is replete with examples, but perhaps the most germane recent episode was less than 20 years ago, at the Sierra Club, which was riven by divisions over immigration. ..

These members advocated sharply restricting immigration, saying the US should be reducing rather than increasing its population. …
The article goes on to say that it is more politically acceptable to advocate educating Third World girls so that they won't want to have babies. Or to attack wealthy inequality, as it is popular to blame wealth ppl for everything.

Monday, October 16, 2017

California bans animal breeding for pets

UPI reports:
California becomes first state to require stores sell only rescue animals

California Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation into law this week that requires pet stores in the state to exclusively sell rescue dogs, cats and rabbits.

Assembly Bill 485, the Pet Rescue and Adoption Act, requires all dogs, cats, and rabbits offered for retail sale in California to be obtained from animal shelters or non-profit rescue organizations. ...

The bill received widespread support from rescue organizations, but was opposed by groups that included the American Kennel Club and California Retailers Association. ...

Assembly Bill 485 unanimously passed the California state senate in September and will go into effect Jan. 1, 2019.
I did not know that there was even any such thing as rescue rabbits.

Now if you buy a dog, you might have to get a pit bull that survived criminal dog fights. I am told that pits bulls are the most common breed in shelters today.

I guess animal breeding is not illegal yet, and you may be able to buy directly from a breeder.

In a few years, California will ban the breeding of humans. If you want a child, you will have to adopt a rescue child from some place like Guatemala or Somalia.

Sunday, October 15, 2017

Democracy will be toast

Vox reports:
Is American democracy in decline? Should we be worried?

On October 6, some of America’s top political scientists gathered at Yale University to answer these questions. And nearly everyone agreed: American democracy is eroding on multiple fronts — socially, culturally, and economically.

The scholars pointed to breakdowns in social cohesion (meaning citizens are more fragmented than ever), the rise of tribalism, the erosion of democratic norms such as a commitment to rule of law, and a loss of faith in the electoral and economic systems as clear signs of democratic erosion. ...

Yascha Mounk, a lecturer in government at Harvard University, summed it up well: “If current trends continue for another 20 or 30 years, democracy will be toast.”
This is a consequence of leftist identity politics and immigration.

Nobody believes in world democracy. Democracy only makes sense if you believe that your fellow man has similar interests. If we are going to admit millions of folks with completely different values, then they will eventually vote to destroy the USA as we know it. It does not make sense to let them all out-vote us.

Saturday, October 14, 2017

How Israeli law mistreats dads

Ever wonder what the Jewish concept of marriage is?

Jews are only 2% of the USA population, but they are 3 out of the 5 supreme court votes to redefine marriage, and also very big in the psychology and lawyer groups that influence family law. And of course Hollywood characters like Harvey Weinstein control how marriage is portrayed in movies and TV. Most ppl assume that Jews have essentially the same Judeo-Christian values as other Americans, but it is not true.

The National Parents Organization reports:
If you think fathers in the U.S. have it tough, you’re right, but nowhere near as tough as do Israeli dads.

I’ve written a fair amount about the horror show that is the family court system in Israel. They make no pretense of fairness or doing what’s best for kids. In Israel, children of divorce get essentially no relationship with their fathers until they’re seven. The meager visitation periods are carried out at supervised locations only. If a father needs to travel abroad, even for a brief period, he has to post a bond in the amount of 100% of the child support he’s required to pay for all the years he’s required to pay it. Feminist organizations oppose every effort to improve children’s relationships with their fathers, even minor ones. As far as I can tell, that opposition is invariably successful.

Now we know why (Israel National News, 10/11/17).
The Knesset's Special Committee for the Rights of the Child will hold a meeting on alienating chil dren from their parents - but will only invite women's organizations to take part.
Yes, the Knesset has decided to gather information about parental alienation, but will get it only from women’s groups. No fathers or fathers’ groups were invited. Say, I wonder how balanced those hearings will be.

Here in the U.S., Canada, the U.K. and the like, feminist groups have routinely claimed that parental alienation doesn’t exist, that the very concept is nothing more than a sneaky move by fathers’ organizations to shanghai children from “protective” mothers who, naturally, are entitled to have the kids, no questions asked. ...

Anti-father bigotry doesn’t get much clearer than what the gender feminists are doing on this issue in Israel and the linked-to article is admirably blunt about the fact.
Most alienated parents are fathers, since mothers automatically receive custody of all children under age six. If even one child is under six years of age, the mother will receive automatic custody of all the siblings in case of divorce.
The latter is a fact I’d not previously known. The Tender Years Doctrine doesn’t only mean that kids under seven automatically live with Mom, but that all their siblings do too, irrespective of age. So the TYD in fact intrudes on all father-child relationships, not just those of kids under seven.
Meanwhile, until the divorce agreements are final, the non-custodial parent meets their children for one hour once a week at a supervised "contact center" only. Finalizing the divorce agreements can sometimes take years, during which time the children are unable to have a healthy relationship with their non-custodial parent (usually the father).
Yes, Israeli courts encourage mothers to drag out the divorce process. Since they have the children until the final order is signed (and in the case of kids under seven, afterward as well), mothers can easily degrade the father-child relationship during the divorce process. During that time, parental alienation is easy to achieve should Mom so desire. Plus,
In addition, mothers are told by their lawyers to lie and claim that their partners hit them or harmed the children.
I don't object to a Jewish country applying Jewish law to marriage, or a Moslem country applying Moslem law.

But I do object to Jews having any say over marriage law for American non-Jews.

Friday, October 13, 2017

Badmouthing colonialism

I posted arguments for colonialism, and here is a rebuttal:
Gilley says he is simply asking for an unbiased assessment of the facts, that he just wants us to take off our ideological blinders and examine colonialism from an empirical perspective. But this is not what he has done. Instead, in his presentation of colonialism’s record, Gilley has deliberately excluded mention of every single atrocity committed by a colonial power. Instead of evaluating the colonial record empirically, he has distorted that record, concealing evidence of gross crimes against humanity. The result is not only unscholarly, but is morally tantamount to Holocaust denial.

First, Gilley says he is making a “case for colonialism,” to rescue Western colonial history’s “bad name.” But he restricts his examination to “the early nineteenth to mid-twentieth centuries.” He does so because if he were to include the first 300 years of Western colonialism (i.e. the majority), it would be almost impossible to mount any kind of case that the endeavor benefited indigenous populations. ...

Next, Gilley’s method of defending colonialism is through “cost-benefit analysis,” in which the harms of colonialism are weighed against the “improvements in living conditions” and better governance. ... We should observe here that this is a terrible way of evaluating colonialism. It is favored by colonialism’s apologists because it means that truly unspeakable harms can simply be “outweighed” and thereby trivialized.
It seems completely reasonable to me that arguments for present-day colonialism would be based on an examination of more recent colonialism, and to look at the costs and benefits.

Saying "morally tantamount to Holocaust denial" is especially strange. Obviously the author has some sort of emotional or religious hatred of white ppl, and badmouthing colonialism is sacred to him.

Thursday, October 12, 2017

Self-hating white people

I was perusing a diversity page of a politically correct site, and to my surprise it had a link for white culture! It was the Center for the Study of White American Culture.

But it turns out that they don't believe in white culture at all. The Center promotes inter-racial marriage, and "decentering whiteness" so that white ppl can learn to be dominated by other races.

The White American Culture site has not been updated in a few years, so maybe the entity is dead.

It defines:
Race - a specious classification of human beings created by Europeans (whites) which assigns human worth and social status using "white" as the model of humanity and the height of human achievement for the purpose of establishing and maintaining privilege and power.
This is nutty. In my experience, non-whites are much more race-conscious than whites.

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

Low IQ kids get spanked more

The libertarian site LewRockwell.com is "ANTI-STATE•ANTI-WAR•PRO-MARKET", and is also anti-spanking:
The duo studied samples of 806 children ages two to four and 704 children ages five to nine and then retested both groups four years later. The IQs of children between the ages of two and four who were not spanked ranked five points higher compared to those who were spanked in their same age group. Children who were five to nine years old that were not spanked were 2.8 points higher in IQ four years later compared to their spanked counterparts. ...

A study published in the Journal of Family Psychology by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Michigan claims that children who get spanked are more likely to “defy their parents and to experience increased anti-social behavior, aggression, mental health problems and cognitive difficulties.“
These were not controlled studies. We know that IQ and personality disorders are largely inborn. All these studies show is that low-IQ misbehaving kids get spanked more. Black kids get spanked the most.

The researchers and the libertarians reverse the causality here, and conclude that spanking causes low IQ and bad behavior. Similar reasoning would conclude that spanking causes black skin.

The dishonesty of these folks is apparent from their refusal to even mention the possibility of reversed causality. The anti-spanking research and advocacy is driven by unscientific beliefs about nonviolence and child rights.

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Amnesty International Nazis

Amnesty International describes its mission:
Overview

Discrimination strikes at the very heart of being human. It is treating someone differently simply because of who they are or what they believe.

We all have the right to be treated equally, regardless of our race, ethnicity, nationality, class, caste, religion, belief, sex, language, sexual orientation, gender identity, age,health or other status. Yet all too often we hear heart-breaking stories of people who suffer cruelty simply for belonging to a “different” group from those in power.

Amnesty’s work is rooted in the principle of non-discrimination.
Based on this, it should stick up for neo-nazis and white nationalists. They are often mistreated for who they are and what they believe.

You might argue that AI is not intending to support groups that hate other groups, but I think they do have that intention. The statement seems worded to include Moslems who believe in killing infidels. AI itself would not agree with killing infidels, but it also seems to support Moslems having that belief.

Monday, October 09, 2017

Censorship on Columbus Day

Want proof that colonialism was a good thing?

I mentioned that Colonialism article might be censored, and now it has happened:
A controversial essay that offered a defense of colonialism and led to a revolt at Third World Quarterly has been withdrawn due to “serious and credible threats of personal violence” to the journal’s editor, according to a notice posted by the journal’s publisher, Taylor & Francis.

The essay, “The Case for Colonialism,” was withdrawn at the request of the journal’s editor, Shahid Qadir, ...
If you have not read the arguments in favor of colonialism, then you do not have an informed opinion on the subject. Now the anti-white thugs will prevent any honest scholarly discussion.

For now, you can find the (pdf) article here.

More and more, celebrations of Columbus Day have been replaced with complaints about Columbus committing genocide against indigenous ppl. Only obscure blogs like Rightly Considered do anonymous philosophers deny that it was genocide.
Most people know that the Aztecs were conquered by Cortez. But how many people know that the Aztecs were an aggressive empire that was at war with other Mesoamerican states? ... Cortez only conquered the far superior Aztec numbers because Tlaxcala and the Totonacs considered the Spanish useful allies to curb the great threat of the Aztecs coming from Tenochtitlan. ...

Although not allies like the Tlaxacallans, the Tarascans also accepted Spanish sovereignty and likewise were exempt from the brutal suppression that the Spaniard inflicted upon the Mesoamerican states they defeated in war. The diverse histories of the Aztecs, Tarascans, and Tlaxacallans make the imposition of a single narrative in Mesoamerica inaccurate or misleading. And certainly the treatment of the latter two cannot be understood as a genocide. ...

Spain does not represent all colonial powers. English and French models were quite different in their approach to the Americas. The French got along famously with the Indians they encountered. The British treated the Indians as sovereign polities and negotiated and made trade agreements and alliances with them.
All this talk of genocide by white-haters is just going to encourage more talk of White Genocide. Currently white countries are being invaded by non-whites from the Third World.

Update: AP reports:
President Donald Trump is proclaiming Monday as Columbus Day — without any of his predecessor's qualms.

The president's proclamation Friday directs the U.S. to celebrate his discovery of the Americas, noting "the permanent arrival of Europeans ... was a transformative event that undeniably and fundamentally changed the course of human history and set the stage for the development of our great Nation."

Trump's proclamation only praises Columbus, Spain and the explorer's native Italy.

It contrasts with President Barack Obama's document almost exactly a year earlier. Obama's proclamation acknowledged Columbus' spirit of exploration. But he said the nation should "also acknowledge the pain and suffering reflected in the stories of Native Americans who had long resided on this land prior to the arrival of European newcomers."
Trump is right here. Columbus's discovery was maybe the most important and positive transformative events in all of human history. That is why Columbus Day is celebrated.

Sunday, October 08, 2017

Facebook admits biased algorithms

I commented that Google has bluffed the public into thinking that its search algorithms are neutral, when they are obviously not. Google employs 10k site raters.

Now Facebook announces:
Nobody of substance at the big companies thinks of algorithms as neutral. Nobody is not aware of the risks.
That was a response:
Stamos’ tweetstorm was set off by Lawfare associate editor and Washington Post contributor Quinta Jurecic, who commented that Facebook’s shift towards human editors implies that saying “the algorithm is bad now, we’re going to have people do this” actually “just entrenches The Algorithm as a mythic entity beyond understanding rather than something that was designed poorly and irresponsibly and which could have been designed better.”
It is nice of Facebook to admit that its algorithms are biased, but Google and Facebook still stubbornly refuse to allow appropriate user control over what is seen.

Google and Facebook could put in fake news filters, and make them user options. No single filter will make everyone happy, For example, some users will want to see Alex Jones links, and some will not. Google and Facebook could allow users to block Alex Jones and similar links, if they wished.

Consider the analogy to email. Most email clients allow you to block senders, or to filter messages according to various criteria. Google Gmail has a spam classifier, but you can override it with your own preferences. The only thing that it completely block is child porn, as far as I know. But you have no such control over Google searches, Google news, Facebook news, etc. Those companies have a left-wing dictatorial mindset where they want to make decisions to control what you see. Apparently they also make more advertising revenue that way.

Saturday, October 07, 2017

Latest leftist gun control idea

The Las Vegas shooting has brought a new round of crazy ideas, and here is the latest:
Michael Moore is proposing that the US repeal the Second Amendment and replace it with a new amendment. Moore’s proposed amendment would include a provision to make a man get permission from his wife or girlfriend before buying a gun:
As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.
I know that Moore is a goof, but he does have a substantial following. Other leftist-feminists probably think like this also.

Friday, October 06, 2017

New Neanderthal genome proves ancestry

The LA Times reports:
Modern humans are a little more Neanderthal than we thought.

A highly detailed genetic analysis of a Neanderthal woman who lived about 52,000 years ago suggests that our extinct evolutionary cousins still influence our risk of having a heart attack, developing an eating disorder and suffering from schizophrenia. ...

Anthropologists believe that the ancestors of modern humans encountered Neanderthals tens of thousands of years ago, soon after they migrated out of Africa. That would explain why modern people of African descent have little to no Neanderthal DNA. ...

The second genome “adds to mounting evidence that Neanderthal ancestry influences disease risk in present-day humans, particularly with respect to neurological, psychiatric, immunological and dermatological” traits, according to the new study led by Svante Pääbo and Kay Prüfer of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany and colleagues. (Pääbo and Prüfer led the 2013 Nature study as well.)

Experts in evolutionary genetics say the endurance of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans makes it important to take a long view of acquired traits. ...

“Neanderthals had been living outside of Africa for hundreds of thousands of years,” said Vanderbilt evolutionary geneticist Tony Capra, who was not involved in the current study. “As our closer human ancestors moved into those environments, it’s possible that interbreeding with Neanderthals gave ancestral humans benefits.”

In a 2009 genetic analysis, Pääbo and colleagues found scant evidence of interbreeding between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals. But as new samples yielded themselves to ever-more-complete analysis, evidence of mating between members of the two distinct peoples has grown.

Such interbreeding gave our human ancestors access to genes that were already adapted to an environment filled with new and unfamiliar challenges, Capra said.
In spite of this genetic evidence, these articles continue to refer to ancient Africans as "ancestors of modern humans", while Neanderthals are called "our extinct evolutionary cousins".

No, the DNA proves that Neanderthals were ancestors to modern Europeans and Asians, and did not go extinct. Furthermore, it seems likely that Neanderthal DNA contributed to positive human traits that helped our ancestors survive in Europe and Asia.

Svante Pääbo is some sort of weirdo Swedish bisexual, and his political-social biases prevent him from drawing the obvious conclusions.

Compare to this Chicago research paper from a century ago:
The Superiority of the Mulatto

American Journal of Sociology
Volume 23, Number 1 (July, 1917)
pages 83-106

E. B. Reuter (1880-1946)

Perhaps the most significant fact regarding the Negro people in America is the degree to which the race has undergone differen- tiation during the period of contact with European civilization. From the low and relatively uniform state of West African culture there has come to be a degree of cultural heterogeneity not else- where observable among a primitive people. While the bulk of the race in America is as yet not many steps removed from the African standards, there has nevertheless arisen a considerable middle class, which conforms in most essential respects to the conventional middle-class standards of American people, as well as a small intellectual group, some members of which have succeeded in coming within measurable distance of the best models of European culture. Within the racial group in America at the present time there are represented the antipodal degrees of human culture: at the one extreme are the standards of West Africa; at the other, those of Western Europe.

A study of the more advanced groups shows a great preponderance of individuals of mixed blood and a dearth, almost an entire absence, of Negroes of pure blood. In the numerous lists of exceptional Negroes, published from time to time by Negroes as well as by white students of race matters, there is a regular recurrence of a few names; the various lists are virtually repetitions. The dozen or score of men everywhere mentioned as having attained some degree of eminence are, in all but one or two cases, men of more Caucasian than Negro blood. In a recently published compilation of one hundred and thirty-nine of the supposedly best-known American Negroes there are not more than four men of pure Negro blood, and one of these, at least, owes his prominence to the fact of his black skin and African features rather than to any demonstrated native superiority. Of the twelve Negroes on whom the degree of doctor of philosophy has been conferred by reputable American universities, eleven at least were men of mixed blood. Among the professional classes of the race the mulattoes outclass the black Negroes perhaps ten to one, and the ratio is yet higher if only men of real attainments be considered. In medicine the ratio is probably fifteen to one, in literature3 the ratio is somewhat higher, on the stage it is probably thirteen to one, in music the ratio is at least twelve to one. In art no American Negro of full blood has so far found a place among the successful. In politics, the ministry, and other occupations in which success is in no way conditioned by education or ability the proportion of mulattoes to black Negroes is somewhat less, though still high. In politics the ratio is at least seven to one, and even in the ministry it is not less than five to one. The successful business men of the race are in nearly all cases men of a bi-racial ancestry. Among the successful men in every field of human effort which Negroes have entered there is the same disproportion between the numbers of pure- and mixed-blood individuals…

Stated in another way, the chances of any child of mixed blood, chosen at random from the general mulatto population, later reaching a degree of distinction that would entitle him to be ranked as eminent is fifteen times as great as would be the chances of a full-blood black child similarly chosen. ...

The Negroes recognized the superiority of their masters and attributed that superiority, as did the white man himself, to the fact of his race and color. They accepted their inferior status as a consequence of their inferiority. No Negro questioned the superior ability of the white, and probably there is no Negro today who does not subconsciously believe the white man superior. Certainly the assumption is less questioned among them than among the whites.

The mulattoes, when they appeared upon the scene, simply took over the prevailing way of thinking. They accepted the white man as superior, recognized the Negro as inferior, and looked upon themselves as an intermediate type. The white man treated them as inferior; the Negroes treated them as superior. They looked up to the white and down on the black. ...

The desire on the part of the Negroes, owing in part to the prestige enjoyed by the mulattoes, results in the condition of almost every superior man among the black Negroes marrying a mulatto wife. The superior mulatto men rarely ever marry into the black group. ...

Further analysis of the facts shows the tendency of the men to select wives of the same or a lighter color. It is quite the exception to find a man married to a woman of a color darker than his own. ...

In the American mulatto the evolution of a superior race may be seen in process.
It is paywalled, but you can get the whole paper on mixedracestudies.org.

There have been major migrations of Africans into Asia and Europe about 50k years ago, and yet this DNA evidence shows that none of them have survived, except by interbreeding with Neanderthals.

Update: The London Telegraph reports:
Struggling to get a tan? Blame your Neanderthal ancestors ...

A raft of new papers published in the journals Science and the American Journal of Human Genetics has shed light on just how many traits we owe to our Neanderthal ancestors.

Scientists also now think that differences in hair colour, mood and whether someone will smoke or have an eating disorder could all be related to inter-breeding, after comparing ancient DNA to 112,000 British people who took part in the UK Biobank study.

The Biobank includes genetic data along with information on many traits related to physical appearance, diet, sun exposure, behaviour, and disease and helps scientists pick apart which traits came from Neanderthals.

Dr Janet Kelso, of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, in Germany, said: “We can now show that it is skin tone, and the ease with which one tans, as well as hair color that are affected.”

When modern humans arrived in Eurasia about 100,000 years ago, Neanderthals had already lived there for thousands of years and would have been well adapted to lower and more variable levels of sunlight than the new human arrivals from Africa were accustomed to.

"Skin and hair color, circadian rhythms and mood are all influenced by light exposure," added Dr Kelso.

"Sun exposure may have shaped Neandertal phenotypes and that gene flow into modern humans continues to contribute to variation in these traits today."
In other words, 50k years ago, black Africans left Africa and mated with lighter-skinned Neanderthals to produce genetically superior offspring. There is debate about what were the advantages of these ancient mulattoes, and one new paper argues that they survived because they had better winter coats made from animal furs.

Thursday, October 05, 2017

Marriage is in open retreat

Texas sociology professor Mark Regnerus pushes his new book in WSJ:
Marriage in the U.S. is in open retreat. As recently as 2000, married 25- to 34-year-olds outnumbered their never-married peers by a margin of 55% to 34%, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. By 2015, the most recent year for which data are available, those estimates had almost reversed, with never-marrieds outnumbering marrieds by 53% to 40%. Young Americans have quickly become wary of marriage.

Many economists and sociologists argue that this flight from marriage is about men’s low wages. ... Another hypothesis blames the decline of marriage on men’s fear of commitment. ...

My own research points to a more straightforward and primal explanation for the slowed pace toward marriage: For American men, sex has become rather cheap. As compared to the past, many women today expect little in return for sex, in terms of time, attention, commitment or fidelity. Men, in turn, do not feel compelled to supply these goods as they once did. It is the new sexual norm for Americans, men and women alike, of every age.
His theory boils down to saying that men are too selfish, and women are too generous.

This is a blue pill theory.

Marriage was redefined, and now it is less appealing to both men and women, for different reasons. These were deliberate policy changes, and not the inevitable result of technology. There has been a leftist movement to abolish marriage, and it has largely succeeded.

Dalrock explains, along with his own criticism of Regnerus:
Margaret Wente at the Globe and Mail* asks where all the good men have gone. ...

What Wente doesn’t understand is that timing is everything. From an economic point of view, women are dividing up sexual access that traditionally would have been reserved only for their husband into two blocks. The first block contains their most attractive and fertile years, and it is dedicated to no strings sex with exciting badboys. Then, once women reach what Rollo calls the epiphany phase, they want to bargain sexual access in their remaining (older and less fertile) years for maximum beta bucks.

Google employs 10,000 human raters

The NY Times explains:
Most people have little understanding of how Google’s search engine ranks different sites, what it chooses to include or exclude, and how it picks the top results among hundreds of billions of pages. And Google tightly guards the mathematical equations behind it all — the rest of the world has to take their word that it is done in an unbiased manner.

“The complexity of ranking and rating is always going to lead to some lack of understanding for people outside of the company,” said Frank Pasquale, an information law professor at the University of Maryland. “The problem is that a lot of people aren’t willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.”
Yes, the public does not know, and has been tricked into believing that it is all done by tightly guarded mathematical equations.
Google said it had added more detailed examples of problematic pages into the guidelines used by human raters to determine what is a good search result and what is a bad one. Google said its global staff of more than 10,000 raters do not determine search rankings, but their judgments help inform how the algorithm performs in the future.
There is the key fact that most ppl do not realize. Google employs 10,000 human raters to evaluate web pages. Google rankings are subjective, and are based on whatever Google decides to promote.

Tuesday, October 03, 2017

Democrats reject white males

Want proof that the Democrat Party has written off white Christian males? Just look at their home web page:
PEOPLE
African Americans
Americans with Disabilities
American Jewish Community
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders
Democrats Abroad
Ethnic Americans
Faith Community
Hispanics
LGBT Community
Native Americans
Rural Americans
Seniors and Retirees
Small Business Community
Union Members and Families
Veterans and Military Families
Women
Young People And Students
Some of these might be interpreted to include white males, but the Democrats don't.

Monday, October 02, 2017

Fall of the Roman Empire

I recommend this 10-minute YouTube clip: The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) --- Senate scene.

In the big-budget Hollywood movie, the Roman Senate debate whether to expel the barbarians, enslave them, or to allow them to become citizens.

The Roman senators seem to lack the will to make Rome great again. The empire is eventually overrun by barbarians.

Sunday, October 01, 2017

Some Africans only very distantly related

ZME Science reports:
Using the latest genetic sequencing techniques, researchers from Sweden and South Africa analyzed the genomes of ancient human remains from KwaZulu-Nata, southern Africa. They report a new deeper divergence timeline of up to 350,000 years for modern humans, far earlier than previously thought. ... Based on the hunter-gatherer genomes, Carina Schlebusch and colleagues at Uppsala University, Sweden, have established the divergence among modern human humans to have occurred sometime between 350,000 to 260,000 years ago.
This is interesting, but what does it have to do with modern humans? It only tells us that some African tribes are more distantly related than was previously thought.
Where and when modern humans emerged is still debatable. For many years, anthropologists used to think humans evolved in one single corner of Africa from where they dispersed into Europe and Asia through the Middle East. More and more evidence, however, is starting to point towards a multiregional origin for anatomically modern humans in Africa.
I thought that the single out-of-africa theory was disproved many years ago. Modern humans evolved in Asia and Europe, after interbreeding between Africans and Neanderthals, not Africa.

Update: There is more info here. Africans are believed to have split from Neanderthals about 600k years ago, and modern Europeans and Asians are descended from both sides of that split.

Friday, September 29, 2017

What to learn in kindergarten

Research in educational methodologies can have an effect, at least in Germany.

Psychology Today reports:
A number of well-controlled studies have compared the effects of academically oriented early education classrooms with those of play-based classrooms (some of which are reviewed here, in an article by Nancy Carlsson-Paige, Geralyn McLaughlin,and Joan Almon).[1]  The results are quite consistent from study to study:  Early academic training somewhat increases children’s immediate scores on the specific tests that the training is aimed at (no surprise), but these initial gains wash out within 1 to 3 years and, at least in some studies, are eventually reversed.  Perhaps more tragic than the lack of long-term academic advantage of early academic instruction is evidence that such instruction can produce long-term harm, especially in the realms of social and emotional development.

A Study in Germany that Changed Educational Policy There

For example, in the 1970s, the German government sponsored a large-scale comparison in which the graduates of 50 play-based kindergartens were compared, over time, with the graduates of 50 academic direct-instruction-based kindergartens.[2]  Despite the initial academic gains of direct instruction, by grade four the children from the direct-instruction kindergartens performed significantly worse than those from the play-based kindergartens on every measure that was used.  In particular, they were less advanced in reading and mathematics and less well adjusted socially and emotionally. At the time of the study, Germany was gradually making a switch from traditional play-based kindergartens to academic ones.  At least partly as a result of the study, Germany reversed that trend; they went back to play-based kindergartens.  Apparently, German educational authorities, at least at that time, unlike American authorities today, actually paid attention to educational research and used it to inform educational practice.

A Large-Scale Study of Children from Poverty in the United States

Similar studies in the United States have produced comparable results.
I think that the trend in the USA is the opposite. Schools ignore the research, and emphasize some current fad for academic learning.

Thursday, September 28, 2017

Lecturer suspended for offensive prediction

I mentioned a video speculating that Hitler might be more highly regarded in the future. Now his university employer is trying to fire him for it:
A New Jersey professor at the center of an alt-right scandal since a video of him apparently spouting anti-Semitic sentiments was revealed last week has been placed on administrative leave.

The New Jersey Institute of Technology released a statement Monday evening announcing the suspension of lecturer Jason Jorjani, who was captured on video as part of a New York Times opinion piece about nonprofit Hope Over Hate's undercover investigation into the white nationalism movement.

Jorjani has insisted his comments in the video were taken out of context.

"NJIT is a university that draws great strength from the diversity of its campus community, and statements made by Mr. Jorjani in a video published by 'The New York Times' are antithetical to our institution's core values," the school said in a statement.

"A review of this and related matters is ongoing, and Mr. Jorjani has been placed on administrative leave pending its conclusion."

In the video, Jorjani is seen talking about the return of concentration camps and foreseeing a future in which Adolf Hitler is regarded as a "great European leader."

Jorjani has come out strongly against the video, saying it was edited to remove the context of the conversation, which he says was about a dystopian society that would result from continuing current U.S. political practices.
I guess academic freedom is antithetical to the institution's core values.

This sort of censorship is likely to backfire. It just makes ppl want to learn more about Hitler, and to suspect that the authorities have been lying to us about him.

Here is a 1920 Hitler speech with offensive attacks on Jews. What is anyone afraid of?

Tuesday, September 26, 2017

The sea-lion meme


Apparently this 2014 Wondermark cartoon is famous for popularizing "sea lion" for a certain type of annoying person on the internet. I think it is trying to say that we are all entitled to our prejudices, without being called out for facts and evidence. Or maybe argumentative bystanders should not get in your face. Or maybe each race should stick to its own kind, I'm not sure.

Monday, September 25, 2017

Adolf Hitler may be on bank notes

Raw Story reports:
Patrik Hermansson, a 25-year-old Swede, went undercover to infiltrate the alt-right, creating a fake identity that led him to meetings with some of the group’s leaders.

As video Hermansson provided to the New York Times shows, he got one of the group’s highest-ranking members — Alt-Right Corporation board member Jason Reza Jorjani — to admit his “final solution” for minorities.

“It’s gonna end with the expulsion of the majority of the migrants, including [Muslim] citizens,” Jorjani told an undercover Hermansson at a pub near the Empire State Building in New York City. “It’s gonna end with concentration camps and expulsions and war at the cost of a few hundred million people.”

“We will have a Europe, in 2050, where the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great,” he continued. “And Hitler will be seen like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category — no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader.”
I don't know whether anyone is advocating such a war, but I do believe that this scenario is possible.

Some European countries will probably keep taking Moslem migrants until they become Islamic countries, and the white Christians and atheists will have to submit to Islamic authorities. Other European countries will reject this, and see deporting the Moslems as their only way out. If this happens, then we could be headed for a world war.

Again, I am not advocating war, and I don't know if Jorjani is either. I am hoping for more sensible immigration policies, and I think that war could be prevented. But policymakers do not listen to me, and I believe that we are on a path that is headed for world war.

Sunday, September 24, 2017

Closet MGTOWs in Si Valley

I am surprised to see this NY Times article:
Silicon Valley has for years accommodated a fringe element of men who say women are ruining the tech world. ...

“It’s a witch hunt,” he said in a phone interview, contending men are being fired by “dangerous” human resources departments. “I’m sitting in a soundproof booth right now because I’m afraid someone will hear me. When you’re discussing gender issues, it’s almost religious, the response. It’s almost zealotry.” ...

“What Google did was wake up sectors of society that weren’t into these issues before,” said Paul Elam, who runs A Voice for Men, a men’s rights group. He said his organization had seen more interest from people in Silicon Valley.

Silicon Valley has always been a men’s space, others said. Warren Farrell, who lives in Marin, Calif., and whose 1993 book, “The Myth of Male Power,” birthed the modern men’s rights movement, said, “The less safe the environment is for men, the more they will seek little pods of safety like the tech world.” ...

One radical fringe that is growing is Mgtow, which stands for Men Going Their Own Way and pronounced MIG-tow. Mgtow aims for total male separatism, including forgoing children, avoiding marriage and limiting involvement with women. Its message boards are brimming with activity from Silicon Valley, Mr. Altizer said.

Cassie Jaye, who lives in Marin and made a documentary about the men’s rights movement called “The Red Pill,” said that the tech world and the men’s rights community had “snowballed” together and that the rise in the number of people in Mgtow is new.

On the Mgtow message boards, members discuss work (“Ever work for a woman? Roll up your sleeves and share your horror story”), technology (“The stuff girlfriends and wives can’t stand — computers, games, consoles”) and dating (mostly best practices to avoid commitment).

“I think there are a lot of guys living this lifestyle without naming it, and then they find Mgtow,” said Ms. Jaye, who calls herself a former feminist.
Jaye's movie is about men's rights activists (MRAs), and does not acknowledge until the very end that the MRAs have very little to do with the game players and the MGTOWs.

What these groups have in common is taking the red pill. This means accepting human nature of men, women, and relationships, and also recognizing practical and legal realities. Where they sharply differ is in what to do about it. They either want to change the system, adapt to the system, or drop out.

Saturday, September 23, 2017

Colonialism article might be censored

I mentioned an essay justifying colonialism, and now the author writes:
I have asked the Third World Quarterly to withdraw my article “The Case for Colonialism.” I regret the pain and anger that it has caused for many people. I hope that this action will allow a more civil and caring discussion on this important issue to take place.
Wow. Obviously he must have been threatened with firing or ostracism.

No, there cannot be a civil discussion of this issue if merely raising the issue causes so much pain and anger that academic articles must be censored.

Obviously the article must have contained a lot of uncomfortable truths. That is why articles get censored.

I am not an expert in colonialism, but it is probably good if the arguments for it are so valid that the only way to refute them is to censor. And if Third World scholars are not capable of discussing an issue without pain and anger, then maybe those countries are not competent to rule themselves.

The NY Times reports:
BERKELEY, Calif. — The class is called symplectic geometry, a high-level course in mathematics that provides elite graduate students at the University of California, Berkeley, a better understanding of, among other things, planetary motion.

But symplectic geometry will not be meeting for its scheduled session on Tuesday because the professor, Katrin Wehrheim, is one of dozens of faculty members who have canceled classes ahead of a series of scheduled appearances by right-wing speakers next week in the latest round of Berkeley’s free speech wars.

“It’s just not safe to hold class,” Professor Wehrheim said. “This is not about free speech. These people are coming here to pick a fight.” ...

“I think a person needs to hear stuff that they don’t agree with,” Ms. Piper said. “They need the opportunity of discovering that they are not going to melt and go down the nearest drain as a puddle if somebody says something ugly to them. I don’t think we should be protected from those experiences.”

In stark contrast to this position is Professor Wehrheim, the symplectic geometry expert, whose German heritage informs a stance that certain speech should be banned from campus.

“Americans are missing the profound analogies between present day U.S. developments and German history,” Professor Wehrheim said.

In Germany today, Professor Wehrheim said, “you will get jailed for certain speech — and I think that is absolutely the right thing.”
So this German professor wants to jail citizens with dissenting political opinions?

The dissenting opinions are not even particularly unusual. They are similar to views expressed by President Trump, who got 60 million votes. They are not in any way a threat to symplectic geometry. These leftist professors are disgusting.

It is funny that the NY Times would pick a German math professor for the anti-free-speech position. He sounds like some sort of Nazi, with his eagerness to jail citizens for their opinions. Most of the leftist-activist-white-hating professors are from soft departments like English and African-American studies.

Update: A widely publicized Brookings poll claimed that about 20% of students agreed with "A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking." It appears that the margin of error is higher than what was first reported, but even so, it is hard to have free speech if 10% of the students believe in using violence to block a campus message.

Friday, September 22, 2017

How cat parasites affect the mind

This story may shed some light on the peculiar personality characteristics of cat-lovers:
The brain-dwelling parasite Toxoplasma gondii is estimated to be hosted by at least 2 billion people around the world, and new evidence suggests the lodger could be more dangerous than we think. While the protozoan invader poses the greatest risk to developing fetuses infected in the womb, new research suggests the parasite could alter and amplify a range of neurological disorders, including epilepsy, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's, and also cancer. "This study is a paradigm shifter," says one of the team, neuroscientist Dennis Steindler from Tufts University. "We now have to insert infectious disease into the equation of neurodegenerative diseases, epilepsy, and neural cancers." The findings are part of an emerging field of research looking into how T. gondii, which is usually transmitted to humans via contact with cat faeces (or by eating uncooked meat), produces proteins that alter and manipulate the brain chemistry of their infected hosts.

Thursday, September 21, 2017

How Libertarians seek to destroy America

Javier Hidalgo is an academic specializing in concocting justifications for illegal immigration, and he writes for a handbook on Libertarianism:
If you’re a libertarian, you should endorse open borders. Here’s why.

Libertarians prize individual liberty. According to libertarians, we have rights to associate with others as we see fit and engage in economic transactions with them. These rights are constraints on state action. Libertarians think it is unjust for states to infringe on individual rights even in order to bring about socially beneficial outcomes. States certainly can’t violate our rights to protect some of us from economic competition or shield our cultures from change.

These commitments should lead libertarians to oppose immigration restrictions. When states restrict immigration, they stop you from associating with foreigners and engaging in many mutually beneficial economic exchanges with them. ...

Some libertarians reject rights-talk. They use more utilitarian reasoning to evaluate public policy. And these libertarians also have a good reason to oppose at least actual immigration restrictions. The same arguments that justify free trade apply to immigration. More immigration increases the division of labor and immigrants help generate more wealth.
I always thought that libertarianism was all about rights, but I only recently learned that is not the case. Many adopt utilitarianism. Under their theory, if you buy a toy for your child, but then encounter another child who would get more happiness from the toy, then you are morally bound to give the toy to the other child. The idea is to do whatever most increases the total happiness of the world.
So, if individuals have rights to private property, then we should reject the view that the United States is the collective property of its government or citizens.
A nation or a corporation is not just the sum of its individuals. Similar reasoning would reject that Microsoft or General Motors could own anything. We could never have modern civilization if such reasoning prevailed.
Maybe you’re concerned that immigration will change the national culture in bad ways. Immigrants bring new and occasionally upsetting cultural norms and customs with them. But you lack a right to freeze cultural change. ... Sure, immigration brings about cultural change. Deal with it. ... As an aside, I’m more worried about my fellow citizens [link to Donald Trump] destroying valuable institutions — not immigrants!
Libertarianism is apparently some sort of suicide pact. Even if immigration destroy the nation, the Libertarians will say "deal with it" and refuse to do anything.

The primary concern of most American Libertarians is dope-smoking. They want to sit back, and let America be invaded by immigrants who are not libertarians at all. They do not even believe in most of the freedoms that Americans take for granted.

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Google is censoring Gab.ai

This is weird:
The tech industry’s opposition to a proposed bill is causing Google and other big companies to be lumped in with sex traffickers, such as in this headline on a New York Times column earlier this month: “Google and Sex Traffickers Like Backpage.com.”

Facebook, Twitter and other companies also oppose the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017, which would update the 1990s-era Communications Decency Act to hold website operators such as Backpage accountable for enabling sex trafficking.
I don't believe that Backpage promotes child sex trafficking. I just don't see any proof of it. So this probably is a bad law.

But Google, Facebook, and Twitter are on the forefront of censoring right-wing opinions on the internet. They are currently conspiring to shut down Gab:
The social media service Gab, which bills itself as Twitter for the alt-right, is on the verge of being booted from the internet.

Andrew Torba, CEO of the company, posted on Monday that “Gab's domain registrar has given us 5 days to transfer our domain or they will seize it.” ...

Prior to the suit, Google had suspended Gab from its Google Play app store in August. Google said it removed Gab because of its insufficient “level of moderation, including for content that encourages violence and advocates hate against groups of people.” The company said the app violates the store’s terms of service.
Gab is just a forum, where ppl express opinion. Violent threats are not permitted. Some advocate limiting immigration, but that is considered hate speech.

Meawhilte, Google is hosting much more offensive content, like this YouTube video: XXXTENTACION - Look At Me!.

Google and Facebook are also in trouble for posting Islamic terrorist propaganda.

So Google and Facebook say that child sex trafficking and Islamic terrorism info are just fine, but political opinions against immigration have to be banned! Those companies must really be run by some sick creeps.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Bring back Western Colonization

Bruce Gilley writes a paywalled article, The case for colonialism:
For the last 100 years, Western colonialism has had a bad name. It is high time to question this orthodoxy. Western colonialism was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial and subjectively legitimate in most of the places where it was found, using realistic measures of those concepts. The countries that embraced their colonial inheritance, by and large, did better than those that spurned it. Anti-colonial ideology imposed grave harms on subject peoples and continues to thwart sustained development and a fruitful encounter with modernity in many places. Colonialism can be recovered by weak and fragile states today in three ways: by reclaiming colonial modes of governance; by recolonising some areas; and by creating new Western colonies from scratch.
If this wrong, you might expect scholarly articles rebutting it. Instead, the leftists want to censor it:
Now several petitions are circulating (here and here) to ask for the retraction of this article, and an apology from the editors. Together, the petitions garnered around 16,000 signatures. The editor of Current Affairs, Nathan J. Robinson, went as far as to say that the article was “morally tantamount to Holocaust denial”, because it does not mention any “colonial atrocities” (although it does refer to at least one book about such atrocities).
These articles explain that most of the world would rather live under the authority of white ppl. Maybe a new colonization would improve the Third World enuf that the citizens are less eager to move to white countries.

Monday, September 18, 2017

Migrants who hate whites

Suketu Mehta writes in Foreign Policy mag:
The West is being destroyed, not by migrants but by the fear of migrants. ...

Driven by this fear, voters are electing, in country after country, leaders who are doing incalculable long-term damage: Donald Trump in the United States, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Andrzej Duda and his Law and Justice party in Poland. It was fear of migrants that led British voters to vote for Brexit, the biggest own goal in the country’s history. ...

It shows that when countries safeguard the rights of their minorities, they also safeguard, as a happy side effect, the rights of their majorities. The obverse is also true: When they don’t safeguard the rights of their minorities, every other citizen’s rights are in peril. ...

It is every migrant’s dream to see the tables turned, to see long lines of Americans and Britons in front of the Bangladeshi or Mexican or Nigerian Embassy, begging for a residence visa.
He makes it pretty clear that he hates the West, that he hate White Christian culture, and that he is all in favor of migrants trying to destroy white culture.

It is not true that attempts to safeguard minorities have safeguarded the rights of others. On the contrary, those attempts have led to the most serious infringements on free speech and a lot of other rights. The migrants have lowered the quality of life in most places.

Here is another view:
Universalist Whites of the West will need to destroy the Globohomo propaganda hate machine, AND they will need the help, in interbred blood or electoral power, of their clannish White brethren to prevent the West from driving off the cliff. Trump has channeled both forces, but he can’t do it alone. He needs his people to keep him honest.
And another:
The mainstream media failed to see the rise of Donald Trump in 2016. Now it’s overlooking another grassroots movement that may soon be of equal significance — the growing number of liberals “taking the red pill.” People of all ages and ethnicities are posting YouTube videos describing “red pill moments” — personal awakenings that have caused them to reject leftist narratives imbibed since childhood from friends, teachers, and the news and entertainment media.

You might say that those who take the red pill have been “triggered.” But instead of seeking out “safe spaces,” they’re doing the opposite, posting monologues throwing off the shackles of political correctness.

Their videos can feature the kind of subversiveness that was once a hallmark of the left—before the movement lost its sense of humor.
Today's kids get a lot of brainwashing. Some of them eventually come to a realization that they have been lied to all their lives.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Global warming on Harris podcast

I tried to listen to this podcast:
Waking Up with Sam Harris #95 - What You Need to Know About Climate Change (with Joseph Romm)

In this episode of the Waking Up podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Joseph Romm about how the climate is changing and how we know that human behavior is the primary cause. They discuss why small changes in temperature matter so much, the threats of sea-level rise and desertification, the best and worst case scenarios, the Paris Climate Agreement, the politics surrounding climate science, and many other topics.

Joseph Romm is one of the country’s leading communicators on climate science and solutions. He was Chief Science Advisor for “Years of Living Dangerously,” which won the 2014 Emmy Award for Outstanding Nonfiction Series. He is the founding editor of Climate Progress, which Tom Friedman of the New York Times called “the indispensable blog.” In 2009, Time named him one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and Rolling Stone put him on its list of 100 “people who are reinventing America.” Romm was acting assistant secretary of energy in 1997, where he oversaw $1 billion in low-carbon technology development and deployment. He is a Senior Fellow at American Progress and holds a Ph.D. in physics from MIT. He is the author of Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know.
I expected to hear a good description of what is known about climate. Instead I got an unconvincing polemic.

He kept arguing that we should go along with the 97% of climate scientists. He also claimed a consensus that Trump was unfit to be President.

He kept mixing scientific and political arguments. He refused to admit weaknesses in the science or data.

A revealing point is when Harris asks why it is so important to say that humans caused the warming of the last 50 years or so. After all, if green energy is going to save millions or billions of lives, then why would we care whether it is a response to a human-induced crisis?

Romm was adamant that the humans must be blamed. Otherwise, he says that you could never convince ppl of the urgency of the action needed.

This view seems to be common, but it is hard for me to take anyone seriously who says that. Are they more interested in making things better in the future, or making moral judgments about the past? If they are really interested in the future, then it shouldn't matter how we got here.

But when they get all moralistic about the past, then they appear to be Gaia Earth Goddess worshippers whose main goal seems to be remedy some ecological injustice.

I wonder if Romm convinces anyone. He is supposed to be an expert in communicating climate science, but he seems terrible at it. I don't think that I learned any science at all.

At the end, Harris asks this question, from Scott Adams: "How much subjectivity is involved in the climate science as you move from the measuring devices to the climate models?" Instead of answering the question, Romm went into a rant about how stupid Adams is, and saying that models are used throughout science.

Adams is not a scientist, but he used to do financial modeling, and those models were very subjective. Saying that models are used throughout science tells him nothing, as models are also used throughout finance. They still can be subjective.

Obviously Romm does not want to admit the subjectivity of the models.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Zuckerberg writes hate book, alleges harassment

Donna Zuckerberg wrote some articles attacking the Alt-Right, including racial attacks, and now complains about online harassment.

I wonder how many of these harassment stories are hoaxes.

Candace Owens has a theory that much of it comes from leftist feminist sock-puppets. Most of the anti-semitic incidents in the news have turned out to be Jewish hoaxes. Neo-Nazi and KKK incidents have also turned out to be leftist hoaxes.

Zuckerberg is about to publish a Jewish feminist book on "dead white males". How would she like it if a neo-Nazi published a book on "dead Jewish females"? My guess is that her brother would ban any mention of it on Facebook.

Friday, September 15, 2017

Chinese have term for White Left

The Chinese have a word for the political views that seem to dominate the American news media and Democrat party:
The curious rise of the ‘white left’ as a Chinese internet insult ...

If you look at any thread about Trump, Islam or immigration on a Chinese social media platform these days, it’s impossible to avoid encountering the term baizuo (白左), or literally, the ‘white left’. It first emerged about two years ago, and yet has quickly become one of the most popular derogatory descriptions for Chinese netizens to discredit their opponents in online debates.

So what does ‘white left’ mean in the Chinese context, and what’s behind the rise of its (negative) popularity? ...

The question has received more than 400 answers from Zhihu users, which include some of the most representative perceptions of the 'white left'. Although the emphasis varies, baizuo is used generally to describe those who “only care about topics such as immigration, minorities, LGBT and the environment” and “have no sense of real problems in the real world”; they are hypocritical humanitarians who advocate for peace and equality only to “satisfy their own feeling of moral superiority”; they are “obsessed with political correctness” to the extent that they “tolerate backwards Islamic values for the sake of multiculturalism”; they believe in the welfare state that “benefits only the idle and the free riders”; they are the “ignorant and arrogant westerners” who “pity the rest of the world and think they are saviours”.

Apart from some anti-hegemonic sentiments, the connotations of ‘white left’ in the Chinese context clearly resemble terms such as ‘regressive liberals’ or ‘libtards’ in the United States. In a way the demonization of the ‘white left’ in Chinese social media may also reflect the resurgence of right-wing populism globally.
The rest of the world (outside Europe and the USA) must think that it is very strange to tolerate backwards Islamic values for the sake of multiculturalism.

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

The atheist community is dying

I have sometimes mocked leftist-atheist-evolutionists here, but the whole movement is crumbling, according to its more prominent blogger, PZ Myers:
The skeptic-atheist community broke apart when Cultural Marxism was introduced into it e.g. third wave feminism, identity politics, intersectionality. New rules for behavior and speech were introduced. This ideology even demonised the most prominent and influential atheists like Dakwins or Harris as bigoted, racist, islamophobic white males.

As a counter movement, many skeptics became fiercely anti-SJW. There the division took place.

The “Cultural Marxist” remark gives it away. This is one of those pseudoscientifically racist people who whines about white genocide. ...

One flashpoint where the differences crystallized: Rebecca Watson and Elevatorgate. You remember that — when Watson, in response to a late-night suggestion in an elevator said “Guys, don’t do that”, and ...
Now I think that Myers and many of the skeptic-atheist-humanist community have some sort of mental illness. They get trapped by crazy issues like elevatorgate, and reading their rants makes you wonder how they ever cope with ordinary life.

Elevatorgate was some story about how some guy supposedly made some mildly flirtatious comment in ordinary conversation, and some feminist wanted to make an issue out of it. All the atheist communities then spent about a year arguing about it.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Big NPR story is a Jewish cartoon

NPR Radio reports:
In Israel, a lot of people are talking about a Facebook post. It was put up by Yair Netanyahu, the son of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over the weekend, the 26-year-old posted a cartoon bashing his father's adversaries. That cartoon was swiftly criticized for containing anti-Semitic imagery. The post was shared by former KKK leader David Duke. It was also praised by the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer. Netanyahu's son, we should say, did take down the post. But the prime minister has declined to comment on it. ...

Well, if you can picture it, it's a row of characters. And each one dangles a kind of fishing rod in front of the next. And it seems to depict who controls the world. So the liberal, American, Jewish philanthropist George Soros is the master manipulator in the cartoon.
You can see the cartoon here.

So why is this news? Because no one is supposed to suggest that rich liberal Jews control some politicians? Because no one is supposed to get agreement from some guy who dressed up in a KKK outfit 40 years ago?

What I get out of this is that some Jewish-influenced news media do not want anyone to suggest that liberal Jews control the world, and if someone does, then the Jews will destroy him.

After a;;. a;; the other ethnic groups get mocked in political cartoons without such controversy.

Monday, September 11, 2017

Race is real, racism is not

A reader sends this essay:
Racism Is Real. Race Is Not. ...

What justifies the continued use of racial classification? Nothing, or so I argue in Replacing Race, an open-access article published recently in the philosophy journal Ergo.

I argue that there are no races, only racialised groups – groups that have been misunderstood as biological races. ...

This is not merely an opinion. From a scientific perspective, the best candidate for a synonym for “race” is “subspecies” (the classification level below “species” in biology). When scientists apply the standard criteria to determine whether there are subspecies/races in humans, none are found. In chimpanzees yes, but in humans no.

Racial classification is unscientific. ...

“Race” is not needed for purposes of social justice. ...

The ConversationWe need to be talking about racism, racialisation, and racialised groups, not “race”.
Here is what a leftist evolutionist says, while also giving a partial defense of a Marxist denial of race:
Edwards asked “Can individual humans be assigned to races from genetic data?”, or, alternatively, “Can human races be diagnosed (in the taxonomic sense of subspecies)?” The answer is yes, they can. ...

Lewontin and Edwards agree on the moral equality of human beings; Edwards just doesn’t want that moral equality to depend on any contingent facts of genetic similarity. Lewontin wouldn’t want it to, either, but sees the high genetic similarity among human races (genetic similarity is much lower among races in some other species) as empirical reinforcement for his moral conclusion.
I think the problem here is that the much-hated Richard Spencer gives an argument:
Race is real.
Race matters.
He prefers to live in a white ethnostate.
These leftists do not want to deal with the rest of his argument, so they just try to cut it off at the start, and pretend race is not real.

So race is real, according to science, popular culture, and common sense. But what about the other half of the claim in the above paper, and "racism is real"? No support is offered for that conclusion at all.

I have come to the conclusion that racism is not real. There is no generally accepted definition of it. Some say that reciting demographic or scientific facts about racial groups is racist, and some don't. Some say that failing to affirmatively equalize all groups in society is racist, some don't. Some say it is racist for races to live separately, some say it is racist for them to live together. Some say that it is racist to say "black lives matter", while others say that it is racist to say "all lives matter".

In most cases, "racist" is just a meaningless epithet, like "jerk" or "nazi". Nobody says it as part of an intellectual conversation. Racism does not exist, except for name-calling.

Sunday, September 10, 2017

Anglin debates Vox Day

Two of the most deplorable of the deplorables on the Alt-Right are Vox Day and Andrew Anglin, and now they had a public debate! You can find links to the video here and
here.

I haven't watched it yet, but this should be enlightening. They both have coherent worldviews, and they brilliantly expose what is wrong with today's leftists. They both have millions of internet followers, and they are fearless about saying something politically incorrect.

For their opinions, Anglin is being unpersoned, and I would not be surprised if Vox Day is also.

It turns out that they have some sharp disagreements about where our society should be headed. Both of them are so far outside the mainstream that these differences are of mainly academic interest. Neither is going to get his way anyway.

If you need trigger warnings, these guys are offensive sometimes. But if you do not hear their views or other Alt-Right views, then you are being brainwashed.

Saturday, September 09, 2017

More Twitter and YouTube bans

A PJ Media column reports:
Twitter has banned writer Elizabeth Johnston, who writes at "The Activist Mommy," for her war of words with Teen Vogue editor Phillip Picardi

Not only has Twitter banned her, but YouTube will not allow her video commentaries to be monetized. While Johnston's posts and views are controversial to some, none of what she has to say is new. Her views on homosexuality come from the best-selling book in the world — the Bible. The tweet that got her booted was a little salty and perhaps not the best tactic to use for persuasion, but it wasn't any more obscene than the Teen Vogue article.
She was criticizing a Teen Vogue article on anal sex.

Twitter and Google are enemies of free speech. Same with Facebook and Apple.

The white Christian minority

AP reports:
NEW YORK (AP) -- The share of Americans who identify as white and Christian has dropped below 50 percent, a transformation fueled by immigration and by growing numbers of people who reject organized religion altogether, according to a new survey released Wednesday.

Christians overall remain a large majority in the U.S., at nearly 70 percent of Americans. However, white Christians, once predominant in the country's religious life, now comprise only 43 percent of the population, according to the Public Religion Research Institute, or PRRI, a polling organization based in Washington. Four decades ago, about eight in 10 Americans were white Christians.
This trend sometimes goes under the name White Genocide.

Most of the white Christians are older, so the trend is more pronounced if you look at younger ppl. We have policies to import millions of non-whites and non-Christians, and most of those coming are young and reproducing more rapidly. In a few years, white Christians will be an even smaller minority. They are already a smaller minority in California.

The non-whites and non-Christians mostly think that this trend is a good thing, and they support the policies that diminish the white Christian share of the population.

Many white Christians have somehow been convinced that they must never speak against this trend, because that would make them bigots. So they strangely celebrate their own demise.

Friday, September 08, 2017

Hard to communicate accross IQ gap

Neuroskeptic says this is an oversimplification:
Let’s say high IQ is a blessing which comes with a terrible price. And each and every person with reading east from 135 has paid that price.

HIgh IQ persons usually have also extremely vivid and wide spectrum of emotions and emotional life, and when they are happy, they are in rapture, and when they are unhappy, it is sheer emotional hell. The IQ is a great enabler, and it unfortunately also enables to experience unhappiness in much deeper and profound way than anyone with mediocre IQ would.

The concept of communication range was established by Leta Hollingworth. It is +/- 2 standard deviations (roughly 30 points) up or down on one’s own IQ. It denotes the range where meaningful interaction (communication, discussion, conversation and socializing) is possible. If the IQ difference between two persons is more than 30 points, the communication breaks up. The higher IQ person will look like an incomprehensible nerd and the lower IQ as a moronic dullard – and they will not find anything common.
There do not seem to be any hard studies proving this, but there is some truth to it.

I can talk to a small child that might have 80 less IQ points, but I do not attempt to have an intelligent conversation. If I attempt an intelligent conversation with an adult with 30 less IQ points, then inevitably he or she will make some completely false inference from something I said, and I have to spend most of my time explaining what I think should be obvious to a 10-year-old, and it seems unlikely that the person is getting anything else right either.

At the other end, dumb ppl normally do not realize how much smarter other ppl are.

As an example, look at how much time President Trump has to spend explaining points when ppl misquote or misinterpret him. It is as if he is 30 IQ points smarter than anyone at CNN or the NY Times. It is hard to believe everyone in the news media is really that stupid. Maybe they were not always that stupid, but learned to dumb down in order to relate to their low IQ viewers and readers.

The Less Wrong community is convinced that in a couple of decades, AI super-intelligent robots will pass up human intelligence by 30 IQ points or so, and thus we could lose our ability to communicate effectively with them. They do not want to slow down AI research, so they want us humans to up our game, and learn to behave more logically so that we can coexist with the super-intelligent robots.

Thursday, September 07, 2017

The coming food shortage

The NY Post reports:
The world could be facing a food shortage in just 10 years, according to an agricultural data technology company.

Gro Intelligence founder and chief executive Sara Menker says previous calculations about food supply have focused on mass and weight, not nutritional value — and this is where things become problematic.

Previously the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization has predicted that the world’s population will reach 9.1 billion by 2050 and the world needs to produce 70 percent more food to feed all these extra people.

But at a TEDGlobal event Arusha, Tanzania, Menker said if you look at the nutritional value of current food production instead, global food security is more tenuous than originally thought.

According to Quartz, Menker believes the year 2023 will be the crossover point when we will no longer be able to produce enough food to feed a growing population.

She has estimated that by 2027, there could be a 214 trillion-calorie deficit, which is the equivalent of 379 million Big Macs.

Demand will be driven by population and economic growth in China, India and African countries.
If this is correct, then soon we will all be expected to make sacrifices in order to subsidize runaway population growth in China, India, and Africa.

It makes more sense to isolate those countries. Stop sending them food and technology, and stop allowing them to export their population problems. They will eventually learn to solve their own problems.