Sunday, March 26, 2017

Here is a NY Times book review of a feminist book denying differences between men and women:
Myths of Sex, Science, and Society
By Cordelia Fine ...

She dissects as she goes, bringing a probing intelligence not only to what we believe about gender, and why it’s often wrong, but also to the history of how we came to think it was so. ...

Again and again, Fine questions the way we think of biological sex “as a fundamental force in development that creates not just two kinds of reproductive system, but two kinds of people.” (Or as she quotes yet another academic: “Psychologically, men and women are almost a different species.”) ...

When she told her young son — who, she notes, “has a strange, unchildlike interest in taxidermy” — that it was time to get the family dog neutered, he excitedly suggested turning the testicles into a key ring.
Is that what happens when a gender-equality pseudo-science academic tries to raise a boy? He celebrates castration? Weird.

Scientifically, the book is nonsense. Sex differences in humans are real. See Cochrane or Coyne for details.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

Trump right about Jewish false flag

An Alt-Right (and Nazi troll) site says:
Quick recap:

The Jews began receiving hoax bomb threats in their “Jewish Centers” (which is apparently the same thing as a synagogue) back in January. These continued until earlier this month.
This was connected to ADL and SPLC reports claiming that “hate crimes” were on the rise, due to the candidacy and subsequent election of President Trump.
Also, some cemeteries were vandalized, with no one ever getting caught (one instance was later attributed to the wind).
The media made it a headline story for literally months that a crisis was taking place in America, with white Trump supporters getting ready to begin gassing Jews.
The ADL made all sorts of demands on President Trump, berating and attacking him, claiming he wasn’t doing enough to address the “hate crimes”
The Daily Stormer and David Duke made it clear that we believed that there was almost certainly a Jew behind the attacks. My own reasoning is that you would have to be very smart to make calls untraced for this long, and anyone smart enough to do that would know it would only be good for the Jews. I also reasoned that it confirmed the claims being made by the ADL and the SPLC in a way that was very convenient.
We were attacked by the media and the ADL for this, saying it was despicable that anyone would ever suggest that Jews would hoax hate crimes against themselves.
A black man was arrested for making seven or eight of the calls, and it was determined he was trying to frame his ex-girlfriend as responsible.
Donald Trump, when confronted about the prank calls, asserted that they were probably a false flag.
Donald Trump was attacked by the entire Jewish media and the Jew ADL and SPLC as a pure anti-Semite hater for having dared to suggest that Jews would do a false flag to gain sympathy.
Jews demanded the government give them billions of dollars and create a special taskforce on anti-Semitism.

And then, yesterday, the FBI, having traveled to Israel, caught the perpetrator. An Israeli Jew.
So the Jewish political activists still complain about anti-Semitism:
These were acts of anti-Semitism. ...

On March 1, I penned a column excoriating Donald Trump and other mainstream conservatives for suggesting attacks on Jewish sites — bomb threats, vandalism, and otherwise — were false flag attacks designed to discredit the right. ...

The man who did this was anti-Semitic.
Okay, so the rise in anti-Semitism consists of Jews complaining about what other Jews are doing.

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Backward switches down under

I just learned an amazing fact. In Australia and New Zealand, in the southern hemisphere, light switches are wired so that UP = OFF and DOWN = ON!

This is opposite the USA if you consider the orientation relative to gravity, but the directions are consistent if you think of them as being on the opposite side of the world.

I found this explanation:
The direction which represents "on" also varies by country. In the USA and Canada and Mexico and the rest of North America, it is usual for the "on" position of a toggle switch to be "up", whereas in many other countries such as the UK, Ireland, Australia, and in New Zealand it is "down." ... In countries prone to earthquakes, such as Japan, most switches are positioned sideways to prevent the switch from inadvertently being turned on or off by falling objects.
The UK also drives on the wrong side of the road. The explanation for Japan is even weirder. Only the Japanese would have such a goofy and far-fetched concern.

Think about it -- when you turn on your eyesight, do you raise or lower your eyelids? Maybe those Australians think of themselves as walking around upside-down.

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Professor is disoriented by Trump

From a kooky leftist psycho analysis professor in a NY Times op-ed:
Now many of us throughout American society at large, after an interminable electoral campaign and transitional phase into the presidency of Donald J. Trump, have experienced a form of disorientation and anxiety ...

But in an important sense, anti-fact campaigns, such as the effort led by archconservatives like the Koch brothers to discredit scientific research on climate change, remained within the register of truth. They were forced to act as if facts and reality were still in place, even if only to subvert them. For example, when they attempted to undermine the findings of legitimate scientists, they often utilized rational arguments concerning certainty, probability and proof. ...

But Donald Trump and his operatives are up to something qualitatively different. Armed with the weaponized resources of social media, Trump has radicalized this strategy in a way that aims to subvert our relation to reality in general. ...

As long as Steve Bannon and his colleagues continue to destabilize our sense of reality, and their opponents fail to recognize how these techniques work, those who oppose him will continue to stumble. ...

On the hopeful side, there has recently been a robust and energetic attempt not only by members of the press, but also of the legal profession and by average citizens to call out and counter Trumpism’s attack on reality. ...

Joel Whitebook is the director of the Psychoanalytic Studies Program at Columbia University. His latest book is “Freud: An Intellectual Biography.”
The Koch brothers are neither archconservatives nor Trump supporters. They are libertarians.

Apparently it really annoys Prof. Whitebook that his political enemies use rational arguments and facts.

You might expect ivy league professors to believe in facts, but Freudian psychoanalysts have their own "relation to reality", and they get very annoyed when anyone subverts it. For Freud, dealing with reality was the exception, as his famous quote "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" indicates.

At least he admits that Trump-haters like himself are suffering "disorientation and anxiety".

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

White hatred on CNN

From a CNN broadcast:
CUOMO: You're entitled to your opinion about all these things obviously. I want to go back at this one more time because it's that Important. A Muslim American, an Italian American, A Christian American, Jewish American, you do realize that they are all equal, all the same thing. We don't need babies from one of those groups more than we need them from another of those groups. Do you agree with me? ...

CUOMO: There are a lot of people teaching hatred in their families who are white, Irish, Italian, who are Muslim. A lot of people preach hate. There's hate in a lot of different groups. I get you have Muslim extremism that there's a concern in this country about it. But I asked you something else. These people are either all equal or they are not in your view. A Muslim American, an Italian American, German American like you and your blood, your roots. They are either all equal or they are not in your mind. What is the answer?
No, they are not "the same thing". No one in any of those groups would say that he is the same as the other groups.

We have different words because they are different. As Cuomo acknowledges, there are different hatreds in different groups.
CUOMO: If you want to apply that kind of thinking to America, it seems like a complete contradiction of what we're all about. This is the melting pot. We are known by those countries as the bastion of diversity. It's an unqualified strength for us.
No, race-mixing and refusing to recognize differences is not what America is about.

Diversity is not an unqualified strength. Ethnic diversity has some advantages, but it also has disadvantages. When he mentions hatreds, he shows that he is not completely blind to those disadvantages. Maybe Cuomo is Nazi.

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

The gatekeepers are censors

Here is a misguided leftist fool:
Sunday was the 28th anniversary of the day that 33-year-old Tim Berners-Lee submitted his proposal for the World Wide Web -- and the father of the web published a new letter today about "how the web has evolved, and what we must do to ensure it fulfills his vision of an equalizing platform that benefits all of humanity." ...

Tim Berners-Lee writes: ... We must push back against misinformation by encouraging gatekeepers such as Google and Facebook to continue their efforts to combat the problem, while avoiding the creation of any central bodies to decide what is "true" or not.
No, encouraging gatekeepers means creating central bodies to decide what is true. He contradicts himself.

Monday, March 13, 2017

Irregardless of other people's judgement

The London Daily Mail reports:
Revealed: The five genuine signs of intelligence that people can't fake - so how many do YOU possess? ...

1. You learn from your mistakes ...

5. You don't care what others think

Seriously intelligent people don't consider other people when making decisions.

They don't think about how others will feel as a result of their own actions and do things irregardless of other people's judgement.
Before you tell me that intelligent ppl would know that "irregardless" is not in the dictionary, look it up. Smart ppl do not worry about such trivialities. My dictionary says The Cubs Won the World Series, and 'Irregardless' Is a Word.

Sunday, March 12, 2017

Still blaming Ferguson Mo

The NY Times is still printing stories blaming white ppl for Ferguson Mo, and here is the latest:
Instead, Mr. Pollock believes that the new video shows Mr. Brown giving a small bag of marijuana to store employees and receiving cigarillos in return as part of a negotiated deal. Mr. Pollock said Mr. Brown left the cigarillos behind the counter for safekeeping. ...

But Jay Kanzler, a lawyer for the convenience store and its employees, strongly disputes that version of events, and said the new footage is unrelated to Mr. Brown’s later visit to the store.

“There was no transaction,” Mr. Kanzler said. “There was no understanding. No agreement. Those folks didn’t sell him cigarillos for pot. The reason he gave it back is he was walking out the door with unpaid merchandise and they wanted it back.”
Dozens of witnesses, recording, and autopsies proved that Brown was a criminal who tried to kill a cop. Any defense of Brown is just an endorsement of black ppl killing white cops.

Even if Brown were some sort of low-level marijuana dealer, how does that help his case? He robbed a store and tried to kill a cop!

The NY Times and the Obama administration used this story endlessly to incite anti-white-police hatred for its ideological purposes.

Amazon now bans books

Amazon used to carry all books, but not anymore:
The online retailer Amazon has stopped selling three Holocaust-denial books after Jewish groups voiced growing frustration that the website was giving a platform to antisemites.

Amazon has been criticised for years over the revisionist titles for sale on its website, but the recent upsurge in antisemitism across America promoted Robert Rozett, a senior official at Yad Vashem, to write to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos last month calling for immediate action.

On Wednesday morning, the three titles that Mr Rozett had complained about were unavailable for purchase. ...

The titles in question were: Holocaust: The Greatest Lie Ever Told, by Eleanor Wittakers; The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, by Arthur R Butz and Did Six Million Really Die? by Richard Harwood.
Amazon has also banned The Bad War: The Truth NEVER Taught About World War II.

I assume that you will still be able to get public domain books like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf.

Maybe Bezos is a Nazi. I very much doubt that he thinks that these books are dangerous. Banning them just sends a message that Jews have the desire and the power to control what you learn and think.

Voltaire is credited (incorrectly) for saying: "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize".

Thursday, March 09, 2017

Current knowledge about human evolution

Razib Khan posts
10 things about human evolution (genetics) you should know (simpler)

1) Modern humans stayed in Africa for tens of thousands years of before expanding beyond it. Most of the ancestors of non-African humanity seem to have started expanding rapidly from a small founder group of less than 1,000 people, starting around 50-75 thousand years years ago. African humanity has a more complex pattern. Some groups diverged as early as 200,000 years ago, then mixed back together.

2) Don't think of humanity as a branching tree. Rather think of humanity as groups of streams. Some streams end, many fold back on one another, and some suddenly have massive expansions. Surprisingly, all major human population groups we know today seem to be the product of relatively recent fusions. Even Africa, the source of modern humanity, has seen streams flow back from Eurasia.

3) Many of the characteristics people focus on today are of recent origin. At least as measured in thousands or tens of thousands of years. 8,000 years ago parts of Europe were populated by brown skinned hunter gatherers with blue eyes. Whiter skin is a (relatively) recent development. And the thick straight hair now common among East Asians is recent as well.

4) The genetic variant which helps Tibetans tolerate very high altitudes comes from a human lineage as divergent from modern humans as Neanderthals are. The Denisovans. This illustrates a general trend: we have adaptations from other very diverged human lineages in our genes today. Even if the genetic percentage is small.

5) The transition to agriculture and complex civilization seems correlated with the explosive growth of a few select male Y chromosomes. Think Genghis Khan.

6) It seems unlikely there is one genetic change which made humans humans. This is less certain than 1-5, but I'm pretty sure it's true. Researchers have been looking for this for years and haven't turned up anything definitive. I think the reason is simple enough: many genetic changes came together to make us distinctive.

7) A lot of variation between human groups is not due to novel genes. Rather it comes from increasing the popularity of pre-existing genetic variants. For example, the lightening of skin across parts of Eurasia is due to an increase of genetic variants which are common to many human populations. Height is another example.

8) Cultural flexibility does not means humans are not evolving. On the contrary, strong shifts in cultural norms seem to drive human evolution. Lactase persistence (the ability to drink milk as an adult) is a clear case. But even genetic tolerance to malaria was ultimately driven by human created environmental changes.

9) There are no "most ancient" human group. By definition, we are all equally separated in time from our common ancestors.

10) There are hints of possible new discoveries coming from ancient human DNA. For example there is evidence of humans leaving Africa ~100,000 years ago into Eurasia in both genetic and fossil data. These earlier humans may have been overrun by a later group. But this is hard to determine with the current data. The DNA of current and ancient humans still has many stories to tell.
This may all be consistent with known info, but some of it is phrased strangely.

Sure all humans are equally evolved, if you define the terms so that it has to be that way. Not, if you use some other definition. Eg, some have evolved lactase persistence, and some have not.

Saying "Modern humans stayed in Africa" is contradicted by other items, including (2) recent fusion, (3) recent origin, (4) adaptations from other lineages, etc. The current evidence is that modern humans developed outside of Africa.

Neanderthal ancestors (and hence human ancestors) left Africa a lot more than 100k years ago.

Tuesday, March 07, 2017

Court destroys jury secrecy

The NY Times reports:
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that courts must make an exception to the usual rule that jury deliberations are secret when evidence emerges that those discussions were marred by racial or ethnic bias.

“Racial bias implicates unique historical, constitutional and institutional concerns,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority in the 5-to-3 decision.

The case arose from statements made during jury deliberations in a 2010 sexual assault trial. “I think he did it because he’s Mexican, and Mexican men take whatever they want,” a juror said of the defendant, according to sworn statements from other jurors submitted by defense lawyers after the trial was over.

The juror, identified in court papers as H.C., was a former law enforcement officer.
Maybe Kennedy is a Nazi.

It appears that Kennedy thinks that all Mexicans are rapists, and only govt regulation of private thoughts will allowing the continued importation of Mexican labor to displace Americans. And the so0called liberals on the court agree.

If you are ever on a jury, and you disagree with what the other jurors are doing, just go tell the judge that you think that some of them are racists. Then the judge will have to declare a mistrial, based on this supreme court decision.

If you argue for the guilt of the defendant, don't give any reasons except to parrot what the prosecutor said. Anything else could be considered racist.

Saturday, March 04, 2017

No man would ever babysit

An Australian newspaper op-ed explains:
When our first daughter was born my husband and I made a family rule: no man would ever babysit our children. No exceptions. This includes male relatives and friends and even extracurricular and holiday programs, such as basketball camp, where men can have unrestricted and unsupervised access to children.

Eight years, and another daughter later, we have not wavered on this decision. ...

The blanket rule against allowing our daughters to be in the care of lone male adults means that we do not have to make a moral assessment of every man. My husband and I do not want to delve into the characters of every man that we know and assess whether or not they are potential sexual predators, so we apply our rule to all men to avoid casting aspersions on people. ...

In this context, potentially hurting peoples' feelings is the price my husband and I are prepared to pay.

Kasey Edwards' new book Guilt Trip: My Quest To Leave The Baggage Behind will be released in May 2017.
This is genius. When Pres. Trump announced his travel ban, he should have just announced he was banning all Moslems "to avoid casting aspersions on people."

Maybe school segregationists should have explained that they don't want to assess the character of black ppl, so it would be better to separate them all to avoid casting aspersions.

Sometimes I see arguments that we must submit to the demands of some group, or they will turn into crazy killer. Here is a variant:
Actor Riz Ahmed has warned that a lack of diversity on TV is alienating young people.

Actor and rapper Riz Ahmed has warned that the enduring failure to champion diversity on TV is alienating young people, driving them towards extremism and into the arms of Isis. ...

Ahmed called on the government to act, particularly to overturn the unconscious bias in hiring that was preventing talented people from black, Asian and minority backgrounds rising up the ranks. He said public money should be tied to representation targets for broadcasters to break the cycle of top jobs going mainly to white men.
I thought that the top jobs already went to minorities, namely, Jews. If anything, we should have more top jobs for white Christians and Republicans.

If the Moslems are just one TV show away from joining ISIS, then maybe they are too unstable for top jobs anyway.

Friday, March 03, 2017

Marriage is Dead

Marriage is dead if no one believes in it anymore, and I am afraid the following beliefs may be typical.

Philip Greenspun's Weblog writes:
A middle-aged married father of two, in between his ecstatic praise of Barack Obama and enthusiastic expressions of support of Hillary Clinton, often mentions his passion for gay marriage. Another subject of which this Bay Area dweller is fond is the pernicious influence of Christianity and Judaism on American society. The other day he said that he couldn’t stand conservative Christians for suggesting that Americans were descending into anarchy due to an abandonment of Christian values.

I asked “Without Christian values or similar cultural ones, wouldn’t a man be free to abandon his middle-aged wife and young children in favor of a childless 25-year-old woman?” He replied “If he needs to do that I wouldn’t judge him.” What about the woman who leaves her husband and kids to travel the world in an Eat, Pray, Love-style journey of self-discovery? It turned out that was okay as well.

The conversation reminded me of one that I had recently with a college student (and, of course, therefore at least a moderately outspoken advocate for LGBTQIA rights). His non-working mom, attractive at nearly 50, had sued his high-income father and used the resulting cash to enjoy a sex-and-travel relationship with a man just over 30. The student acknowledged that the divorce had a devastating effect on him and his sibling, ruining their teenage years. However, he said that he thought that his mother was right to break up their home because “people shouldn’t stay married if there is no passion.” I asked “So if a guy is married to a woman who is exhausted from running after kids and thus tends to collapse at night before the question of passion becomes relevant, he should feel free to seek passion with a 22-year-old off craigslist?” The answer turned out to be basically “yes” because in deciding whether or not to stay married there were no important considerations other than the passion currently experienced by one of the married adults.

I’m wondering if the whole gay marriage debate among heterosexuals was the result of the two sides misunderstanding each other’s concept of “marriage.” Marriage under the law of a typical U.S. state is a temporary financial arrangement that can be terminated by either party for any reason (“no fault”; see Real World Divorce). But citizens often invest the term with additional meaning. Perhaps the hetero anti-gay-marriage folks dragged in concepts from religion and ideas that marriage might involve a personal sacrifice? While the hetero pro-gay-marriage folks added in stuff about passion and personal satisfaction? So they ended up talking past each other and, though using the same word, were talking about two different things.
A comment says:
What marriage means to supporters of the right of gays to marry is irrelevant. What matters is what marriage means to the gay people who until recently were prevented by the government from marrying, for no reasons other than religiously motivated ones.
No, it is not irrelevant. The supporters of gay marriage have bullied everyone into abandoning marriage as it has been understood for centuries.

We used to have non-religious advocates of marriage. I happen to think that the best arguments against same-sex marriage were non-religious. But even if marriage is a religiously motivated concept, that does not make it harmful.

It is possible that most of reasons for same-sex marriage and other anti-marriage laws are also religiously motivated. That is, ppl want to strike a blow against Christianity and other traditional religions. How else can you explain so much interest in an issue that affects less than 1% of the population.

My opinions on marriage do not matter. If the dominant opinions in our society favor the view of gays, Eat-Pray-Love, and online arrangement of extramarital affairs or prostitution, then marriage is dead. See this poem, if you are wondering about the Eat-Pray-Love view of marriage.

Wednesday, March 01, 2017

Leftists who hate statistical sciences

Jerry Coyne reports:
At any rate, despite his immense contributions in many areas, Galton’s forays into eugenics have led to his current demonization. According to the Evening Standard and the Telegraph, University College students have started a “Galton must fall” campaign, apeing the “Rhodes must fall” campaign at Oxford. Presumably, if examination of Galton’s legacy shows him to have pernicious and influential ideas about selective breeding of humans, his legacy should be effaced. As two students wrote on the UCL History blog:
Francis Galton was beyond any doubt tremendously innovative. Some of his scientific output, especially in the fields of meteorology and statistics, is still valid today. Yet Galton’s legacy can be open to question and debate. His endorsement of selective breeding can arguably be construed as paving the way for the ideology of racial hygiene in Nazi Germany. His pivotal role in the eugenic movement, though firmly rooted in the broader assumptions of his age, shocks many of our contemporaries. Whether or not Galton must fall, we are in no position to judge. But it is our belief that this debate needs to be informed by historical research.
Here is the Cntl-Left at work. If Galton were wrong, they would be content to publish his errors. No, they must censor and ostracize him.

Galton was a scientist. I don't know about his politics, but apparently he had some ideas for improving the human condition. He was scientific and honest and sincere, as far as I know. Blaming him for the Nazis is like blaming Einstein for the Nazis.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Industrialization benefits the Third World

Here is a recent TED Talk:
How do we make sense of today's political divisions? In a wide-ranging conversation full of insight, historian Yuval Harari places our current turmoil in a broader context, against the ongoing disruption of our technology, climate, media — even our notion of what humanity is for. This is the first of a series of TED Dialogues, seeking a thoughtful response to escalating political divisiveness. Make time (just over an hour) for this fascinating discussion between Harari and TED curator Chris Anderson. ...

Harari's previous book, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, explores what made homo sapiens the most successful species on the planet. His answer: We are the only animal that can believe in things that exist purely in our imagination, such as gods, states, money, human rights, corporations and other "fictions," and we have developed a unique ability to use these stories to unify and organize groups and ensure cooperation. Sapiens has sold nearly five million copies and been translated into more than 50 languages. Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and President Barack Obama have recommended it as a must-read.
At the end, Harari makes an argument that the Third World countries that suffered the most from globalism, imperialism, and industrialism in the last two centuries will also suffer the most from climate change.

His book has an impressively-broad scope, but his conclusions are wacky. Those countries have been huge beneficiaries of industrialization and the carbon-buring western civilization. They have gotten food, medicine, technology, knowledge, peacekeeping, and all sorts of other benefits. How have they suffered?

This talk shows him, as well as TED Talk management, to be extreme leftist globalists. He is an Israeli, which maybe explains some of his political views.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

More wacky psychology research

Here is the latest on cats causing mental illness:
Cats host a parasite called Toxoplasma gondii that other research has linked to various mental illnesses. So, for some time, people have wondered whether cats are unsafe; for example, pregnant women are usually told to stay away from litter boxes. (They should still do this because transmission during pregnancy is very real.) In a study published in the journal Psychological Medicine, researchers looked at data that tracked 5,000 Brits born in the early '90s until they were 18. This included information about whether the kids grew up with cats, or whether there were cats around when the mother was pregnant. After the scientists controlled for factors like socioeconomic status, there was no link between developing psychosis and having owned a cat. The researchers suggest that previous studies that did show a link had relatively small sample sizes. In addition, many of these studies asked people whether they remembered having cats, which is not quite as accurate. That said, it's important to keep in mind that some mental disorders linked to the parasite -- like schizophrenia -- tend to be diagnosed fairly late in life, so only tracking until age 18 might limit the study.
Yes, I would be surprised if cats cause full-blown schizophrenia by age 18. The effects are more subtle than that, and some of them have been proven in animals.

The book Thinking, Fast and Slow is widely considered a masterpiece from one of our greatest living intellectuals. See, for example, very high praise from Harvard Psychology professor Steven Pinker and Liar's Poker author Michael Lewis.

The book is crap, and I have criticized it before on this blog.

Here is another refutation:
In Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking Fast and Slow” he introduces research on social priming – the idea that subtle cues in the environment may have significant, reliable effects on behaviour. In that book, published in 2011, Kahneman writes “disbelief is not an option” about these results. Since then, the evidence against the reliability of social priming research has been mounting.

In a new analysis, ‘Reconstruction of a Train Wreck: How Priming Research Went off the Rails‘, Ulrich Schimmack, Moritz Heene, and Kamini Kesavan review chapter 4 of Thinking Fast and Slow, picking out the references which provide evidence for social priming and calculating how statistically reliable they:

Their conclusion:
The results are eye-opening and jaw-dropping.  The chapter cites 12 articles and 11 of the 12 articles have an R-Index below 50.  The combined analysis of 31 studies reported in the 12 articles shows 100% significant results with average (median) observed power of 57% and an inflation rate of 43%.  …readers of… “Thinking Fast and Slow” should not consider the presented studies as scientific evidence that subtle cues in their environment can have strong effects on their behavior outside their awareness.
In other words, his work relies on a flawed statistical analysis, and the claimed effects were not replicated in subsequent studies.

Here is a famous psychiatrist, giving his nutty political/academic opinions:
To the Editor:

Fevered media speculation about Donald Trump’s psychological motivations and psychiatric diagnosis has recently encouraged mental health professionals to disregard the usual ethical constraints against diagnosing public figures at a distance. They have sponsored several petitions and a Feb. 14 letter to The New York Times suggesting that Mr. Trump is incapable, on psychiatric grounds, of serving as president.

Most amateur diagnosticians have mislabeled President Trump with the diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder. I wrote the criteria that define this disorder, and Mr. Trump doesn’t meet them. He may be a world-class narcissist, but this doesn’t make him mentally ill, because he does not suffer from the distress and impairment required to diagnose mental disorder.

Mr. Trump causes severe distress rather than experiencing it and has been richly rewarded, rather than punished, for his grandiosity, self-absorption and lack of empathy. It is a stigmatizing insult to the mentally ill (who are mostly well behaved and well meaning) to be lumped with Mr. Trump (who is neither).

Bad behavior is rarely a sign of mental illness, and the mentally ill behave badly only rarely. Psychiatric name-calling is a misguided way of countering Mr. Trump’s attack on democracy. He can, and should, be appropriately denounced for his ignorance, incompetence, impulsivity and pursuit of dictatorial powers.

His psychological motivations are too obvious to be interesting, and analyzing them will not halt his headlong power grab. The antidote to a dystopic Trumpean dark age is political, not psychological.

Coronado, Calif.

The writer, professor emeritus of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University Medical College, was chairman of the task force that wrote the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV (D.S.M.-IV).
Maybe Frances should check whether he has one of those mental disorders.

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Feminists hate cryptic billboard

Here is a goofy feminist gripe:
Women are planning this weekend to protest a North Carolina billboard with a message they say is a slam on gender equality, according to media reports.

A billboard on a highway between Winston-Salem and Greensboro reads, "Real men provide. Real women appreciate it." It's on Business 40, a heavily traveled commuter stretch of an offshoot of Interstate 40 that runs between the two cities.

Winston-Salem boutique owner Molly Grace said that she sees the sign's message as an attempt to silence women who want to be seen as equals to men.

"It's absolutely, absolutely insulting to single mothers, to women who have careers whether they are small careers or big careers," Grace said.
I am not sure of the point of the billboard, but how is it insulting? Are these feminists saying that men should not provide? Or that women should not appreciate male providers? They are sick.

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Name for invasive peoples

Much of the news media refuses to use the term "illegal alien", and saying things like "undocumented immigrant" instead.

Now I learn that ecologists use the terms "alien species" and "invasive species", with the main difference being that the latter term is used to imply harm.

And many ppl argue that illegal aliens are beneficial to the USA, because they supply cheap labor, drive down wages, and support Democrats. And they validate some silly poem about "wretched refuse" ppl.

So maybe we need a term like "invasive peoples" to convey harm. The main objection to illegal aliens is not that they are illegal or that they are alien; it is that they are intruders who are destroying the ecosystem. The term "wretched refuse", which seems popular among pro-immigration folks, seems too pejorative.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

High Noon was a Commie Film

NPR Radio Fresh Air just broadcast an episode on how the 1952 movie High Noon was made by a Communist. He knew the the Commies were evil but refused to testify about them and got a fat financial settlement.

The guest was pushing a book claiming that the movie was some sort of statement about Communism. In his view, the town was a metaphor for Hollywood, and its spineless amoral cowardly residents represent the leftist Jews who run the movie business.

The guest also complains about the Hollywood blacklist and President Trump.

I do not see this movie as creating sympathy for Communists and leftist Jews who refused to testify. I do not get whatever point the guest was making.

NPR says:
In the late 1940s and early 1950s, as anti-communist sentiment gained ground in the United States, paranoia and persecution swept through Hollywood. The House Un-American Activities (HUAC) began interrogating some of the country's most talented filmmakers and actors, accusing them of being communists or communist sympathizers.

Author Glenn Frankel tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross that the government was "looking to see or to prove that there had been communist infiltration in Hollywood, that this was part of a mass plot engineered by Moscow to take over our cultural institutions."

Many who appeared before the HUAC were put on a blacklist that made it impossible for them to work in show business. Among the blacklisted was screenwriter Carl Foreman, whose 1952 classic western High Noon is seen as a parable about the toxic political climate of the time.
But as the program explains, Foreman was not blacklisted for appearing before the HUAC. He was blacklisted for being a Communist, for refusing to repudiate Communism, and for cowardly refusing to testify about Communist infiltration of Hollywood.

It may seem paranoid today to suggest that Hollywood filmmakers were communists or communist sympathizers, but this author confirms that Foreman was both. He was a member of the Communist Party, and he went to a lot of trouble to cover up for other Communists who were putting propaganda into films. Apparent Foremen himself was putting propaganda into High Noon, altho his thinking was apparently so twisted that most ppl missed it.

Representation in Hollywood

Ever hear anyone say that blacks are not properly represented in Hollywood? From this chart, it appears that black representation more closely matches the American population than other major groups. The underrepresented groups are Whites and Latinos.

The NY Times had an article complaining that Beyonce had only won 22 Grammys. It is funny how that paper always finds a way to blame white non-Jews for everything.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Are Liberals Helping Trump?

From a NY Times opinion column:
Are Liberals Helping Trump? ...

Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous. But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right. In recent interviews, conservative voters said they felt assaulted by what they said was a kind of moral Bolshevism — the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one. Disagreeing meant being publicly shamed.

Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood may seem to liberals to be about policy and persuasion. But moderate conservatives say they are having the opposite effect, chipping away at their middle ground and pushing them closer to Mr. Trump.

“The name calling from the left is crazy,” said Bryce Youngquist, 34, who works in sales for a tech start-up in Mountain View, Calif., a liberal enclave where admitting you voted for Mr. Trump is a little like saying in the 1950s that you were gay. ...

“The Democratic Party has changed so much that I don’t even recognize it anymore,” she said. “These people are destroying our democracy. They are scarier to me than these Islamic terrorists. I feel absolutely disgusted with them and their antics. It strengthens people’s resolve in wanting to support President Trump. It really does.”
There has been a political re-alignment. The crazy left (aka the Ctrl-Left) is on one side, and Trump is on the other.

The NY Times prints lies about Trump every day.

Pat Buchanan explains some of Trump's enemies:
But the deep state is after larger game than General Flynn. It is out to bring down President Trump and abort any move to effect the sort of rapprochement with Russia that Ronald Reagan achieved.

For the deep state is deeply committed to Cold War II.

Hence, suddenly, we read reports of a Russian spy ship off the Connecticut, Delaware and Virginia coasts, of Russian jets buzzing a U.S. warship in the Black Sea, and Russian violations of Reagan’s INF treaty outlawing intermediate-range missiles in Europe.

Purpose: Stampede the White House into abandoning any idea of a detente with Russia. And it appears to be working. At a White House briefing Tuesday, Sean Spicer said, “President Trump has made it very clear that he expects the Russian government to … return Crimea.”

Is the White House serious?

Putin could no more survive returning Crimea to Ukraine than Bibi Netanyahu could survive giving East Jerusalem back to Jordan.
From another opinion column:
A ton of folks are coming to Kjellberg’s aid after this whole thing, saying that The Journal has blown the whole thing out of proportion. Do you buy that?

Farhad: Well, if by “blown out of proportion” he means they accurately reported that he’s repeatedly invoked Nazi imagery and recently paid some folks to hold up a sign saying “Death to All Jews,” then I guess that’s right!
As I understand it, PewDiePie was paying ppl $5 to make distasteful statements, to see how far they would go. The WSJ is more Fake News. Disney is also pretty disgusting for going along with this.

Yesterday's NY Times editorial argued:
Where could the demonizing and dehumanizing of the foreign born lead but to a whiter America? You have heard the lies ...

Think of the message sent if the “day without immigrants,” in which foreign-born workers stayed home, became a week or a month.
I guess it is saying that a "whiter America" would be the message, and the non-white interests that control the NY Times are against that. They advocate anti-white policies at every opportunity.

Of course these white-haters call Trump and his followers a racist at every opportunity. After his press conference last week, they were all calling him racist for how he offered to meet with the Congressional Black Caucus. Or maybe it was for not recognizing the initials "CBC" in a black reporters question. Or maybe it was for thinking if someone is trying to get him to have a particular kind of meeting, then that someone might want to facilitate the meeting. I am not sure, as they mainly just use name-calling and do not explain themselves.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Why Jews are called Jews

I think that I am understanding the Israel-Arab situation better. The United Nations, Democrat Party, and various others propose a two-state solution. The ppl who live in what would be those two states are against it.

Israel's position is:
So here’s the substance: There are two prerequisites for peace that I laid out two years -- several years ago, and they haven’t changed.

First, the Palestinians must recognize the Jewish state. They have to stop calling for Israel’s destruction. They have to stop educating their people for Israel’s destruction.

Second, in any peace agreement, Israel must retain the overriding security control over the entire area west of the Jordan River. ...

Why do - - why are Jews called Jews? Well, the Chinese are called Chinese because they come from China. The Japanese are called Japanese because they come from Japan. Well, Jews are called Jews because they come from Judea. This is our ancestral homeland. Jews are not foreign colonialists in Judea.
The Palestinian Arabs also have two demands: ethnic cleansing of the West Bank, and unlimited Arab immigration into Israel.

Israel has repeatedly offered a separate state to the Palestinian Arabs, if it would bring peace, but they have rejected it every time.

In short, the Jews want an ethnic state like China and Japan, and the Palestinian Arabs want to exterminate the Jews.

Friday, February 17, 2017

Unprecedented: ICE nabs illegal alien criminal

The Wash. Post reports:
A hearing in El Paso County in Texas went from ordinary to “unprecedented” last week when half a dozen Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents showed up at a courthouse where an undocumented woman was seeking a protective order against the boyfriend she accused of abusing her.

The woman, a citizen of Mexico who was living in El Paso had been driven to the courthouse by a victim’s advocate from the Center Against Sexual and Family Violence, a shelter for victims of domestic abuse where she had been living.

She left under arrest. ...

The woman had a prior criminal record and had been previously deported, ...

Last fall the undocumented immigrant filed her first of three police reports against her live-in boyfriend, whom she accused of punching, kicking and choking her, and of pulling her hair. A report from December alleged, according to Bernal, that after failing to stab her with a knife, the boyfriend threw the blade at her instead. He missed. ...

The ICE affidavit does not identify from whom they learned of the woman’s undocumented status, but it says the department “received information that an individual who had been previously deported was in the United States.” The information “mentioned” that the woman had filed a protective order against her boyfriend, who, at the time the affidavit was filed, was in custody for forgery of a financial instrument. The affidavit also states the exact time and place of the woman’s court hearing and that she was living at the domestic violence shelter.
Unprecedented? Now that there is a precedent, I hope to see more deportations of ppl like this.a

I hope I don't hear anyone say that she should be allowed to stay because she filed three police reports, or because tax-funded legal aid workers are assisting her.

Even if you want to help this poor woman, there is very little you can do for someone who keeps filing police reports against her boyfriend, but also keeps moving back in with him.

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Day without Immigrants

Did we really have a day without immigrants? I don't think that they made their point well enuf. Maybe we need a year without immigrants to make the point.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Rants against virtue signalling

Beau Albrecht writes about virtue signalling:
Following a discussion about the transition of power from the old American elite to what James Burnham called the managerial class, Francis describes the type of world the globalists want:
The culture the managers seek to build places more value on individual achievement and “merit” (defined largely as the ability to acquire and exercise managerial and technical skills) than on family inheritance, on sexual fulfillment than postponement of gratification and the breeding and rearing of children, on social mobility and advancement rather than identification with family, community, race, and nation.

But in addition to the family, the managerial class simply does not need other traditional institutional structures to maintain its power— not the local community, not religion, not traditional cultural and moral codes, not ethnic and racial identities, and not even the nation-state itself. Indeed, such institutions merely get in the way of managerial power. They represent barriers against which the managerial state, corporations, and other mass organizations are always bumping, and the sooner such barriers are leveled, the more reach and power the organizations, and the managerial elites that run them, will acquire.
So this is why they favor rootless cosmopolitanism and anti-family policies. These are goals that they have in common with cultural Marxism, though for their own reasons. This new version of leftist ideology fits their agenda quite well, and (at least in practice) it’s not too concerned with vast extremes of wealth, quite unlike old-school Socialism. So globalist plutocrats naturally latch onto something that lets them feel good about themselves and what they’re doing.
And here is a CH rant on the matter, in his peculiar jargon:
Her husband is nothing more than a plush betablob placeholder to grant legitimacy to his reckless Queen’s rule. He has the look of a man in pain. Physical pain as well as soul pain. His limbic system is constipated with suppressed and compacted emotions; you can tell he’s got something big to shout at the world, but he dare not lest his Queen cast him the icy gaze implying present and future sexlessness.

Christcucks are a scourge on Christianity, the Final Feminization of a once-great religion that is rapidly degenerating into a feelz therapy session for the racially alienated and the egotistically coddled. Jesus would, if he were alive today, lash them and strike them from His kingdom like he did the money-changers from the temple. He would know that Christcuckery isn’t love, but empty virtue signaling and moral posturing, much like the ostentatious shows of religiosity of the Pharisees that Jesus condemned in his day.
That blog CH (aka Roissy, aka Citizen Renegade, aka Heariste) frequently faces censorship demands. Truth hurts.

I am getting more and more contemptuous of those who engage in virtue signalling. Those ppl are nearly always making the world a worse place.

Monday, February 13, 2017

The globalists want a managerial class

Beau Albrecht writes about virtue signalling:
Following a discussion about the transition of power from the old American elite to what James Burnham called the managerial class, Francis describes the type of world the globalists want:
The culture the managers seek to build places more value on individual achievement and “merit” (defined largely as the ability to acquire and exercise managerial and technical skills) than on family inheritance, on sexual fulfillment than postponement of gratification and the breeding and rearing of children, on social mobility and advancement rather than identification with family, community, race, and nation.

But in addition to the family, the managerial class simply does not need other traditional institutional structures to maintain its power— not the local community, not religion, not traditional cultural and moral codes, not ethnic and racial identities, and not even the nation-state itself. Indeed, such institutions merely get in the way of managerial power. They represent barriers against which the managerial state, corporations, and other mass organizations are always bumping, and the sooner such barriers are leveled, the more reach and power the organizations, and the managerial elites that run them, will acquire.
So this is why they favor rootless cosmopolitanism and anti-family policies. These are goals that they have in common with cultural Marxism, though for their own reasons. This new version of leftist ideology fits their agenda quite well, and (at least in practice) it’s not too concerned with vast extremes of wealth, quite unlike old-school Socialism. So globalist plutocrats naturally latch onto something that lets them feel good about themselves and what they’re doing.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Apple wants to censor the news

The London Telegraph reports:
Tim Cook, the boss of Apple, is calling for governments to launch a public information campaign to fight the scourge of fake news, which is “killing people’s minds”.

In an impassioned plea, Mr Cook, boss of the world’s largest company, says that the epidemic of false reports “is a big problem in a lot of the world” and necessitates a crackdown by the authorities and technology firms.

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Telegraph, he calls for a campaign similar to those that changed attitudes on the environment to educate the public on the threat posed by fabricated online stories.

Made-up news reports trying to promote a particular agenda gained huge traction on social media in the US during the election.
NPR radio news quoted this with approval.

Cook and NPR are on the Ctrl-Left, and they want to police the fake news. They are mad that they lost the election, and blame their loss on their failure to control the dissemination of info. Meanwhile, NPR broadcasts Trump-haters doing anti-Trump rants every day.

Monday, February 06, 2017

Psychologists were motivated by anxiety

The LA Times reports:
In Washington, D.C., revelers and protesters are marking the ascendance of a new president and the populist movement he says he has mobilized.

Some 1,600 miles away in San Antonio, thousands of psychologists from around the world are also marking the dawn of the Trump era by focusing their attention on the thought processes that prompt some people to resist and reject science. Matters for which there is a broad scientific consensus — including man-made climate change, the safety of childhood vaccines and Darwin’s theory of evolution — have been attacked as hoaxes and lies by senior members of the new administration.

Psychologists have come up with a name for this trend: the “anti-enlightenment movement.”

To better understand it, these professional observers of human behavior will draw from a recent election campaign in which fake news exploded, conspiracy theories flourished and derision was heaped on elites of all kinds.

“We were motivated by anxiety,” said social psychologist Matthew Hornsey, who organized a symposium on the issue for this weekend’s annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.
Is this a joke? Psychologists want to lecture us on scientific thinking and fake news?

Psychology, more than any other field, has been a big source of fake science news. More bogus research comes out of Psychology than anywhere. From the top universities on down, probably half the published papers are completely worthless.

It is also one of the most politicized. There are no social psychologists who are conservatives. I doubt that you could even find 1% of them who would use the term at all. Pretty much all psychologists live in some sort of bubble that is detached from science and reality.

Friday, February 03, 2017

Uber chief is the latest America hater

The Trump presidency has clarified the aims of the Left. The latest company to be exposed as an anti-American evil is Uber.

Here is a silly argument:
According to the Cato Institute, the United States admitted 3,252,493 refugees between 1975 and 2015. Twenty of them were terrorists. This represents some 0.00062 percent of all refugees. Only three attacks carried out by these refugees were successful.

In total, in a span of forty years, “terrorist refugees” have killed three people in the United States.

But what about the attacks in San Bernardino, the Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooting, the Boston Marathon bombings, and 9/11? Are these not “proof” that such a ban is warranted? After all, the individuals responsible for the attacks had some connection to foreign countries.

In reality, the current executive order would have stopped exactly none of these attacks.

The Pulse Nightclub shooter was born in New York and was a U.S. citizen. Of the two San Bernardino shooters, one was born in Chicago. The other, his wife, was born in Pakistan and lived in Saudi Arabia — neither country is on the “banned” list. The Tsatnaev brothers, responsible for the Boston bombings, were born in Kyrgyzstan. People from Kyrgyzstan aren’t banned under the current executive order. Of the 19 people responsible for hijacking four airplanes on 9/11, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE, one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon. Again, these countries aren’t on the “banned” list. ...

Yes, you are more likely to be killed by a gun-wielding toddler than a terrorist.
So we should let the Moslem refugees in, and jail the toddlers?!

No, this is an argument to extend the ban to other Moslem countries. And to deport the Moslems who are already here.

It is true that the govt can spend 2 years vetting a Moslem refugee, determine that he is not connected to any terror networks, let him become a citizen, and then his kid could become a Moslem terrorist.

Terrorism is just the most obvious problem. These refugees and migrants cause a long list of other problems. Just look at how Uber has exploited immigrants and turned them into America-haters.

White House accused of softcore denial

Deborah Lipstadt writes in Atlantic mag:
I quickly learned that the White House had released a statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day that did not mention Jews or anti-Semitism. Instead it bemoaned the “innocent victims.” ... the White House, by not referring to Jews, was acting in an “inclusive” manner.

The de-Judaization of the Holocaust, as exemplified by the White House statement, is what I term softcore Holocaust denial. ...

Softcore denial uses different tactics but has the same end-goal. (I use hardcore and softcore deliberately because I see denial as a form of historiographic pornography.) ...

What we saw from the White House was classic softcore denial. The Holocaust was de-Judaized. ...

Deborah Lipstadt is the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies at Emory University.
I first heard of her when she wrote a book arguing that Holocaust scholars should not debate or try to refute historians with alternative facts.

I guess she gets paid a big salary for sticking to her Holocaust views.

I just post this as info on what a Holocaust denier is. It might be someone who merely used inclusive terms for Holocaust victims.

Here is another Jewish view:
We, Rabbis from across the United States, call on our newly elected officials to keep America’s doors open to refugees.

Faced with the largest refugee crisis in all of human history, the United States must continue to be a safe haven ...
Of course they want to flood America with non-Christians, and keep non-Jews out of Israel. It is amazing how much these ppl hate white Christians.

The NY Times also hates white Christians, and complains:
Mr. Thiel weighed in on the controversy Saturday night, saying through a spokesman that he did not support a religious test for entry into America, “and the administration has not imposed one.” He was the only major figure in Silicon Valley to vocally support the president. ...

About 30,000 people apply for citizenship every year in New Zealand, where the population is less than five million, according to data from the country’s Internal Affairs Department. Only a handful — around one to two dozen a year — are approved for citizenship by the minister of internal affairs under “exceptional” circumstances, the data showed.

Mr. Thiel was one of those. In the application, he noted that he did not fulfill the residency requirements and said that he did not intend to live in the country if he secured citizenship.
Thiel wants to invest money there, but not live there. Who would have a problem with that? The fact that they are so restrictive about immigration makes it a better place to live.

Thursday, February 02, 2017

Have to say pregnant people

Breitbart reports:
Doctors have been told to refer to expectant mothers as “pregnant people” so as not to offend transgender people, in official guidelines issued by the British Medical Association (BMA).

The controversial advice appears in a 14-page booklet on “inclusive language in the workplace” which also rules that the terms ‘biologically male’ and ‘biologically female’ are problematic, and instructs doctors to instead say that the individual was ‘assigned’ male or female at birth.

The union’s new guidelines come just weeks after it emerged that a British woman in the process of ‘transitioning’ gender put her operation on hold to have a baby, the Mail on Sunday reports.

775,000 women give birth in Britain each year, yet there are no other known cases of people in the process of ‘transition’ becoming pregnant.

Despite this, the BMA demands the word ‘mothers’ be dropped from doctors’ vocabularies in relation to pregnancy because it’s offensive to transgender people, and in order to “celebrate diversity”. ...

Members are advised against using ‘male-centric language’, an example of which is the instruction to use the term ‘family name’ instead of ‘surname’, the booklet noting that some linguists believe the latter word “may originate from sire-name, the name derived from one’s father”.

‘Christian name’ is another term the BMA say should be banished from doctors’ vocabularies, the guidelines stating that “to ask a Jewish or Muslim person their Christian name not only makes no sense, but is also highly disrespectful of their beliefs.”

In a section of the booklet relating to race, doctors are warned that “difficulties can arise with expressions that use ‘black’ in a negative way, eg ‘black sheep’, or ‘black mark’.”
This sounds like a joke, but it is not. I didn't even think that "black sheep" was a negative term. It means someone who is different from the crowd, but not necessarily worse. Maybe the BMA thinks that there is something inherently bad about being black or a mom.

I thought that "surname" just meant "last name".

The University of California at Berkeley used to be famous for its Free Speech Movement, but now it is famous for its Regressive Left using violence and arson to silence Milo expressing his opinion.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Nazis infiltrate the Left

I am beginning to think that the Left has been infiltrated by neo-Nazis. Here is a translation of a Sam Harris rant:
"make the case against Trump prior to the election"

please listen, you Hillary voters

"bound to be ineffective in stopping the spread of Islamism"

we need to kill the Moslems

"it is also internally inconsistent"

ignore the inconsistencies in my own position

"opposition to Trump’s order is thoroughly contaminated by identity politics and liberal delusion"

your Trump hatred is wrong

"hire fascists to do the job liberals won’t do"

we need fascism

"speak about the ideological roots of Islamism and jihadism"

we need to snuff them by any means possible

"further provoke and empower Trump"

Go Trump!

"terrifyingly blunt (and even illegal) countermeasures by the Trump administration"

We can only hope.

"you are part of the problem"

Shut up and let the fascists get the job done.
And then PZ Myers attacks him:
“Identity politics” is racist code ...

black people are not more closely related evolutionarily to gorillas than are white people. ..

I reject the politics of white heterosexual male supremacy ...

Sam Harris ... is able to condemn Trump without reservation ...

“Identity politics” is a far right dog whistle. The only identity politics being practiced is a refusal to accept the privileges of being a white man. ...

I have a moral duty to defend Muslims from oppression, violence, and discrimination. I am also able to recognize that someone identifying as Muslim has not confessed to being an Islamist on jihad. ...

At the March for Science, we are committed to centralizing, highlighting, standing in solidarity with, and acting as accomplices with black, Latinx, Asian and Pacific Islander, indigenous, non-Christian, women, people with disabilities, poor, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, trans, non-binary, agender, and intersex scientists and science advocates.
Myers writes about identity politics a lot, and then tells us that it is racist code. Isn't he just telling us that he is a racist?

Why does he keep saying crazy things like comparing black ppl to gorillas? He couldn't keep his job and following if he kept denigrating black ppl as being like gorillas. So what is a good racist to do? He can cite his expertise in evolutionary biology to keep telling us that black ppl are not just gorillas in disguise.

His defense of Muslims is so weak that it is silly. He as might as well say, "I am not supposed to badmouth Muslims so I will point out that they have not all been convicted of murder."

That "March for Science" statement sounds like a joke. Is there a science of white-Christian-male hatred?

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright tweeted: "There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty."

This sounds too dopey to be serious. Aren't the pro-immigration folks the ones claiming that there is some fine print on the statue?

My theory is that the lizard ppl have such complete control over ppl like Harris and Myers that they have to say stupid things as code.

Suppose you were a blogger in North Korea, and criticizing the govt or Kim Jong-Un could get you executed. You don't like the dictator and would like to express your disapproval, but do not dare. So what would you do? You would praise the dictator in gushing terms that do not make any sense. He would not execute you for flattering him, and your readers might understand that you are writing in code.

Likewise, I think that Harris and Myers could be neo-Nazis of some sort. Their arguments are silly and undermine their stated goals.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Skepticism about immigration economics

The London Guardian reports:
Nowhere is this more vividly manifest than with immigration. The thinktank British Future has studied how best to win arguments in favour of immigration and multiculturalism. One of its main findings is that people often respond warmly to qualitative evidence, such as the stories of individual migrants and photographs of diverse communities. But statistics – especially regarding alleged benefits of migration to Britain’s economy – elicit quite the opposite reaction. People assume that the numbers are manipulated and dislike the elitism of resorting to quantitative evidence. Presented with official estimates of how many immigrants are in the country illegally, a common response is to scoff. Far from increasing support for immigration, British Future found, pointing to its positive effect on GDP can actually make people more hostile to it. GDP itself has come to seem like a Trojan horse for an elitist liberal agenda. Sensing this, politicians have now largely abandoned discussing immigration in economic terms.

All of this presents a serious challenge for liberal democracy. Put bluntly, the British government – its officials, experts, advisers and many of its politicians – does believe that immigration is on balance good for the economy. The British government did believe that Brexit was the wrong choice. The problem is that the government is now engaged in self-censorship, for fear of provoking people further.
There is nothing wrong with quantitative evidence, when done right, but the public can recognize that the govt is lying about benefits of immigration.

The British claim that immigration has a positive effect on GDP, but the same arguments says that crime is good because it causes us to spend more money on prisons and law enforcement. It neglects effects on the quality of life, and on long term effects. It is like saying negro slavery was good because it boosted cotton production.

The biggest current controversy is about Syrian immigration. Can anyone tell me specifically how such immigration has any positive effect on Britain or the USA at all? Where I live, most of the social problems are traceable to immigration.

Saturday, January 28, 2017

TED Talk reveals Moslem hatred

TED talks always have leftist messages, and you will never see one that is anti-immigration. I once saw a TED official claim that they did not have political criteria, but then the interview asked if they would consider a talk skeptical about global warming. He said no.

Consider this TED Talk:
As the child of an Afghan mother and Pakistani father raised in Norway, Deeyah Khan knows what it's like to be a young person stuck between your community and your country. In this powerful, emotional talk, the filmmaker unearths the rejection and isolation felt by many Muslim kids growing up in the West -- and the deadly consequences of not embracing our youth before extremist groups do.
All I got out of this was that Moslems from that part of the world are horrible ppl; that you would be crazy to let any of them into a Western country; and if you do, you better surrender to them as children or they will grow up to be terrorists who will kill you.

She says violence will not work against Moslem terrorists, because they want us to be intolerant like them. A better plan, she says, is for Western countries to turn over our white girls to the Pakistani Moslems so that those Moslems will not feel rejected.

Did this audience realize what it was applauding?

Another recent one is the Sofia Jawed Wessel TED Talk
"When we tell women that sex isn't worth the risk during pregnancy, what we're telling her is that her sexual pleasure doesn't matter ... that she in fact doesn't matter," says sex researcher Sofia Jawed-Wessel. In this eye-opening talk, Jawed-Wessel mines our views about pregnancy and pleasure to lay bare the relationship between women, sex and systems of power.

Sofia Jawed-Wessel
Sex researcher
Sofia Jawed-Wessel's teachings utilize a sex-positive and pleasure-inclusive approach to providing medically accurate, comprehensive sexuality education.
This talk reminded me of this insight:
Chateau maxim: “the goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality”
She is a prime example. All she can talk about is increasing her own personal sexual pleasure, while putting down male sexuality.

Monday, January 23, 2017

Racist inquiries about Neanderthals

The NY Times reports:
Geneticists tell us that somewhere between 1 and 5 percent of the genome of modern Europeans and Asians consists of DNA inherited from Neanderthals, our prehistoric cousins.

At Vanderbilt University, John Anthony Capra, an evolutionary genomics professor, has been combining high-powered computation and a medical records databank to learn what a Neanderthal heritage — even a fractional one — might mean for people today. ...

What we’ve been finding is that Neanderthal DNA has a subtle influence on risk for disease. It affects our immune system and how we respond to different immune challenges. It affects our skin. ...

Was there ever an upside to having Neanderthal DNA?

It probably helped our ancestors survive in prehistoric Europe. ...

Maybe those of us of European heritage should be thinking, “Let’s improve their standing in the popular imagination. They’re our ancestors, too.’”
So research by Capra and others has shown that Neanderthals were human ancestors and Europeans today have traits associated with Neanderthal genes.

This is perfect material for the NY Times, as its editors have said that they most like stories that challenge our beliefs about what it means to be human.

But then the interview gets weird:
What has been the response to your Neanderthal research since you published it last year in the journal Science?

Some of it’s very touching. People are interested in learning about where they came from. Some of it is a little silly. “I have a lot of hair on my legs — is that from Neanderthals?”

But I received racist inquiries, too. I got calls from all over the world from people who thought that since Africans didn’t interbreed with Neanderthals, this somehow justified their ideas of white superiority.

It was illogical. Actually, Neanderthal DNA is mostly bad for us — though that didn’t bother them.
He does research on how Africans differ from Neanderthals and other humans, and he is offended that ppl ask questions about his research?

It appears that they just wanted the facts about the diffences, since they were not bothered by whether the differences were good or bad. That is completely normal curiosity about what it means to be human.

It appears to me that any genetic or anthropological research in this field must badmouth the white race in order to be politically acceptable. Articles always refer to Africans as modern humans, and Neanderthals as backward and inferior, even tho Neanderthals were human and Neanderthal genes may have been crucial to the development of civilization.

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Obama's farewell speech

Barack Obama's crying farewell speech said:
If we're unwilling to invest in the children of immigrants, just because they don't look like us, we will diminish the prospects of our own children -- because those brown kids will represent a larger and larger share of America's workforce. (Applause.)
What does he mean here? That we have to pay brown kids to come to America and take our jobs, and that will somehow make our children better off?

No, our children do not benefit from importing brown kids.

This speech got a lot of praise, but all I get out of it is that he hates white ppl, and favors policies that subsidize brown kids replacing white kids.

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Psychology textbooks filled with errors

I have posted many times about bogus psychology research, and this article shows that the textbooks are bad:
Psychology is mired in a replication crisis: Many famous, established findings that experts had assumed to be robust have, in the light shed by newer and bigger and more sophisticated follow-up studies, been revealed as rather flimsy. But what about the very basic, Psych 101 stuff taught in introductory textbooks? That stuff’s all on safe ground, right?

Maybe not. In a paper published last month in Current Psychology by Christopher Ferguson of Stetson University and Jeffrey Brown and Amanda Torres of Texas A&M, the authors evaluated a bunch of psychology textbooks to see how rigorously they covered a bunch of controversial or frequently misrepresented subjects. The results weren’t great.
For another example of bad research, implicit bias studies are flawed. These supposedly show that ppl are racist, but they don't work.

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Facebook can spy on your messages

Ars Technica reports:
The Guardian roiled security professionals everywhere on Friday when it published an article claiming a backdoor in Facebook's WhatsApp messaging service allows attackers to intercept and read encrypted messages. It's not a backdoor — at least as that term is defined by most security experts. ...

Critics of Friday's Guardian post, and most encryption practitioners, argue such behavior is common in encryption apps and often a necessary requirement. Among other things, it lets existing WhatsApp users who buy a new phone continue an ongoing conversation thread.
No. I am an encryption practitioner, and such behavior is neither common nor necessary.

Since Facebook refuses to fix this problem, it should not be promising "end-to-end encryption". Facebook has engineered in a system for spying on messages.

Facebook/WhatsApp argue that their system is more convenient than true end-to-end encryption. That may be. It may also turn out to be useful for law enforcement to track possible terrorists or child molesters. Most users do not need to be concerned about this vulnerability. They are happy to give up some privacy in order to get some free services. But I would not recommend the system for high-security messages.

Update: Bruce Schneier concludes:
How serious this is depends on your threat model. If you are worried about the US government -- or any other government that can pressure Facebook -- snooping on your messages, then this is a small vulnerability. If not, then it's nothing to worry about.
It is a little strange that Facebook/Whatsapp refuses to fix it.

Monday, January 16, 2017

Trump as a kind of steppingstone

NPR Radio celebrates the decline of the Alt-right:
"I see Donald Trump as a kind of steppingstone. He is a step in the right direction in terms of understanding America and history and the world in essentially racial terms," Taylor says.

But white nationalist enthusiasm for Trump has fallen off substantially. Since the election, the so-called alt-right has splintered, and the movement now looks a lot less potent than it once appeared. ...

"I think it's good to be the person talked about, even when it's negative," Spencer tells NPR. "Our ideas are entering the discourse." ...

A movement that sprang from obscurity with Trump's election seems to be dropping back into the shadows even before Trump takes power.
This is wishful thinking. The Alt right got the most publicity when Hillary Clinton gave a speech denouncing it, and when she called the Trump voters deplorable.

Trump's election has redefined the Alt right to be what his administration is doing. Sure, there are factions who are trying to steer him in other directions, and fringe players who troll the press. Milo is probably the biggest trolls. These factions did not agree before Trump, and they will not agree now either.

They agreed that Trump is far better than Hillary Clinton, and so did millions of others.

The Alt-right will always have fringe groups trolling the Democrats, and the Democrats will be calling them deplorable. The possible new DNC leader says:
Top Democrat Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) told his party on Friday that Donald Trump has brought “white supremacy” back to the White House.

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Trying to abolish marriage licenses

Some marriage law reformers announce:
INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (Jan. 11, 2017) – A bill introduced in the Indiana House would end government licensing of marriages in the state, effectively nullifying in practice both major sides of the contentious national debate over government-sanctioned marriage.

Rep. Jim Lucas introduced House Bill 1163 (HB1163) on Jan. 9. The legislation would eliminate three marriage requirements currently in place in the state.

That individuals obtain a marriage license before getting married
That the marriage be solemnized by an individual specified by state law
That the marriage license be filed with a circuit court clerk and the state department of health.

The bill instead “provides for marriage by marriage contract by any two individuals who are competent to contract in Indiana or otherwise permitted to marry in Indiana.”
There are a lot of ppl who foolishly say that disputes over marriage policy can be dodged by govt getting out of the marriage business.

No chance. A lot of states already has common law marriage, so having marriages without govt-issued licenses is nothing new. The article gives the impression that the law would be a return to practice in previous centuries, but that is not true either. The Catholic Church has required marriage ceremonies for 800 years.

The govt has taken over a long list of marriage issues, such as this:
A man in Oklahoma is hoping to change the law after he has to continue to pay child support for a baby that is not his, according to our affiliate KOTV.

When Thomas’ high school girlfriend got pregnant, he married her. Five months later she had a little boy and he believed he had a son, but their marriage fell apart.

Thomas decided to take a paternity test when the boy was three years old.

“It comes back zero percent. I was in my office and I saw that. I should’ve expected it but I didn’t and it hit me. I’m telling my co-worker how shocked I am that someone could do this to someone,” he said.

The judge ordered Thomas to take another DNA test and he got the same result. The judge first ruled that Thomas was off the hook financially, but then reversed the decision because Oklahoma law says men must question paternity within two years of the child’s birth.

Thomas said that he had no reason to question it before he did, but, because he missed the deadline, the judge ordered him to pay around $500 a month in child support and nearly $15,000 in back support – for a child that is not his.
Oklahoma has common law marriage, but this problem is independent of that.

There have been many changes to marriage law, and they are nearly all to increase state control over families. Same-sex marriage is just one of those changes.

Update: It is divorce season.

Friday, January 13, 2017

Europeans want Asimov's laws of robots

Some Europeans are panicking about robots:
To combat the robot revolution, the European Parliament's legal affairs committee has proposed that robots be equipped with emergency "kill switches" to prevent them from causing excessive damage. Legislators have also suggested that robots be insured and even be made to pay taxes. "A growing number of areas of our daily lives are increasingly affected by robotics," said Mady Delvaux, the parliamentarian who authored the proposal. "To ensure that robots are and will remain in the service of humans, we urgently need to create a robust European legal framework." CNNMoney reports:

The proposal calls for a new charter on robotics that would give engineers guidance on how to design ethical and safe machines. For example, designers should include "kill switches" so that robots can be turned off in emergencies. They must also make sure that robots can be reprogrammed if their software doesn't work as designed. The proposal states that designers, producers and operators of robots should generally be governed by the "laws of robotics" described by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments. "You always have to tell people that robot is not a human and a robot will never be a human," said Delvaux. "You must never think that a robot is a human and that he loves you."
I used to agree with some of this, but now I think that it is naive.

We will have robots doing functions so critical that no one will dare turn them off. We will also have robots with software derived from AI learning, and no one understand how it works or how to fix it to correct the behavior.

There will also be human-like robots, and ppl will want robots to love them.

Google and Microsoft now have natural language translation systems that are derived from so much data that no one really understands them. Microsoft even has real-time Skype translation. It is possible that these could become essential parts of the infrastructure of our civilization. It is also possible that translation quirks result in some ppl getting killed. Asking Google or Microsoft to fix those quirks might be hopeless.

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Neanderthals were humans and ancestors

I posted before Neanderthals belonged to the human species. Now the NY Times Magazine has a long article on Neanderthals Were People, Too
But Neanderthals weren’t the slow-witted louts we’ve imagined them to be — not just a bunch of Neanderthals. As a review of findings published last year put it, they were actually “very similar” to their contemporary Homo sapiens in Africa, in terms of “standard markers of modern cognitive and behavioral capacities.” We’ve always classified Neanderthals, technically, as human — part of the genus Homo. But it turns out they also did the stuff that, you know, makes us human.

Neanderthals buried their dead. They made jewelry and specialized tools. They made ocher and other pigments, perhaps to paint their faces or bodies — evidence of a “symbolically mediated worldview,” as archaeologists call it. Their tracheal anatomy suggests that they were capable of language and probably had high-pitched, raspy voices, like Julia Child. They manufactured glue from birch bark, which required heating the bark to at least 644 degrees Fahrenheit — a feat scientists find difficult to duplicate without a ceramic container. In Gibraltar, there’s evidence that Neanderthals extracted the feathers of certain birds — only dark feathers — possibly for aesthetic or ceremonial purposes. And while Neanderthals were once presumed to be crude scavengers, we now know they exploited the different terrains on which they lived. They took down dangerous game, including an extinct species of rhinoceros. Some ate seals and other marine mammals. Some ate shellfish. Some ate chamomile. (They had regional cuisines.) They used toothpicks.

Wearing feathers, eating seals — maybe none of this sounds particularly impressive. But it’s what our human ancestors were capable of back then too, and scientists have always considered such behavioral flexibility and complexity as signs of our specialness. When it came to Neanderthals, though, many researchers literally couldn’t see the evidence sitting in front of them.
The author of this article is still infected with this ignorant anti-Neanderthal bias. It refers to "our human ancestors" to mean non-Neanderthals.

The fact is that DNA tests of the last 5-10 years have proved that Neanderthals were ancestors to the vast majority of non-Africans today. They had large brains, and now archaeological evidence shows that they were behaviorally very similar to other human ancestors.

There is every reason to call Neanderthals our human ancestors. They were humans and ancestors (to all but sub-saharans).

30 years ago, textbooks said:

(1) Neanderthals were very primitive and sub-human.
(2) Neanderthals went extinct, with no extant DNA.
(3) A wave of anatomically modern African migrants 70-100k years ago are our sole ancestors.
(4) Humans have not evolved since that wave.

These are all now known to be completely false.
Some of this is documented in this 2016 PNAS article, Neandertals revised, which also says:
However, from the hundreds of thousands of years in which Neandertals and their African near-modern contemporaries littered their landscapes with all kinds of artifacts, nothing has been retrieved that is in any way comparable to the visual representations (“art”) and the general increase in diversity in material culture we see from around 40 ka onward. These developments coincided with a significant range expansion of modern humans, for the first time in human history colonizing the arctic parts of the Old World (121, 122), as well as moving into Sahul (123), crossing a major biogeographical boundary that had prevented hominin eastward migration for more than a million years.
The date "40 ka" (40,000 years ago) is crucial because that is the time that Africans migrated into Europe and the time that Neanderthals got wiped out. The obvious explanations are that the African killed off the Neanderthals, or out-competed them for resources, or spread disease. Whatever the explanation, it appears that interbreeding resulted in humans that were capable of much more advanced art and travel than either the Neanderthals or African migrants by themselves.