The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By Austen Layard
 All Comments / By Austen Layard
    When did humans first become human? The answer is far from simple, because the question assumes that sometime in the past, humans achieved modernity and were locked within an evolutionary loophole where natural selection no longer applies. Despite the absurdity of this scenario, and in stark contrast to empirical data, it is widely believed that...
  • @Marshall Lentini
    "Marxist" is such a weasel word. I dunno even know if we agree, maybe so, but the obsession with progress is a waste of my time. Always some slippery bullshit.

    “These large and nutritious organisms at the base of the food web provided the burst of energy required for the evolution of complex ecosystems, where increasingly large and complex animals, including humans, could thrive on Earth,” Dr Brocks said.
    “This new timeframe offers a network of explanations for a Neoproterozoic/Paleozoic rise in atmospheric oxygen levels, establishment of more modern nutrient and carbon cycles, and the evolution of an increasingly complex biota [life].” 

    http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mystery-of-how-first-animals-appeared-on-earth-solved-by-scientists/ar-AAqemP3?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point."

    Source? Even then, the assertion that humans are "the newest, youngest species" is not on solid ground because the cichlids are younger.

    "Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?"

    Which traits have humans "gained more of"? You know that some scientists state that chimpanzees are "more evolved" than humans right? (nonsensical claim, each species is adapted to its niche)

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans/

    Give the two linked articles in my previous comment a read and get back to me.

    Are you implying that evolution is "progressive"?

    Are you implying that evolution is “progressive”?

    Can’t be…”progressive” is a loaded word and implies something purpose-driven other than optimizing survival. According to the theory – if the environmental factors demand it (another Ice Age perhaps or nuclear winter), we will ditch our intelligence for better olfactory and ocular senses and perhaps a warmer coat of fur. And we will have evolved.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Marshall Lentini
    "Marxist" is such a weasel word. I dunno even know if we agree, maybe so, but the obsession with progress is a waste of my time. Always some slippery bullshit.

    In the phylogeny on the left below,1 each branch’s length corresponds to the number of amino acid changes that evolved in a protein along that branch. On longer branches, the protein collagen seems to have experienced more evolutionary change than it did along shorter branches. The phylogeny on the right shows the same relationships, but branch length is not meaningful in this phylogeny. Notice the lack of scale bar and how all the taxa line up in this phylogeny.

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#f3

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    I'm sure you are misunderstanding my position. Anyway I've been confirmed.

    'narcissism'
    The influence of Marxist ideals in western society has been to put value onto everything. The State must dictate. People must not rely on their ability to reason objectively - every thought is a slippery slope to eugenics and white supremacism.


    " “Whatever works” is about the sum of it. "

    I couldn't agree more - how are you defining works?


    " this increasingly awful shitshow called civilization."

    To which people flock by the score risking life and limb.


    "My money’s on tardigrades as last animal standing."

    My point exactly. Evolutionary success need not be complex nor recent. Humans could be an evolutionary dead end; a blip.

    “Marxist” is such a weasel word. I dunno even know if we agree, maybe so, but the obsession with progress is a waste of my time. Always some slippery bullshit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    In the phylogeny on the left below,1 each branch's length corresponds to the number of amino acid changes that evolved in a protein along that branch. On longer branches, the protein collagen seems to have experienced more evolutionary change than it did along shorter branches. The phylogeny on the right shows the same relationships, but branch length is not meaningful in this phylogeny. Notice the lack of scale bar and how all the taxa line up in this phylogeny.
    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#f3
    , @helena
    “These large and nutritious organisms at the base of the food web provided the burst of energy required for the evolution of complex ecosystems, where increasingly large and complex animals, including humans, could thrive on Earth,” Dr Brocks said.
    “This new timeframe offers a network of explanations for a Neoproterozoic/Paleozoic rise in atmospheric oxygen levels, establishment of more modern nutrient and carbon cycles, and the evolution of an increasingly complex biota [life].” 
    http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mystery-of-how-first-animals-appeared-on-earth-solved-by-scientists/ar-AAqemP3?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Marshall Lentini
    Forget complexity, since it's an arbitrary value and logically nothing prevents us from swapping it for another. Let's take total biomass as the criterion of greatest evolutionary success: ants, krill and fungi win. All you can do now is insist on complexity as the defining value, which comes down to your preference.

    I’m sure you are misunderstanding my position. Anyway I’ve been confirmed.

    ‘narcissism’
    The influence of Marxist ideals in western society has been to put value onto everything. The State must dictate. People must not rely on their ability to reason objectively – every thought is a slippery slope to eugenics and white supremacism.

    ” “Whatever works” is about the sum of it. ”

    I couldn’t agree more – how are you defining works?

    ” this increasingly awful shitshow called civilization.”

    To which people flock by the score risking life and limb.

    “My money’s on tardigrades as last animal standing.”

    My point exactly. Evolutionary success need not be complex nor recent. Humans could be an evolutionary dead end; a blip.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marshall Lentini
    "Marxist" is such a weasel word. I dunno even know if we agree, maybe so, but the obsession with progress is a waste of my time. Always some slippery bullshit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    I don't need to read anything to see that humans are more evolved than cichlids. You are introducing the term progressive. Yes evolution progresses in the sense that it is subject to the constraints of time but no it doesn't necessarily keep going in the same direction. And no it isn't some grand scheme to create humans. But it did! More is not qualitative it is quantitative. There is more of this stuff called evolution behind humans than behind chimps. And some of that stuff may have been undoing previous stuff. What does Cochran say?

    And before you reject an argument for sheer quantity as criterion of success, remember that you said:

    More is not qualitative it is quantitative. There is more of this stuff called evolution behind humans than behind chimps.

    In other words, you accept quantity as a value in determining success as a species. Perhaps only one sort of quantity is valid, in your opinion. But there we are: opinion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    I think I get it. Evolved mustn't mean complex. But are humans more complex than cichlids?

    Forget complexity, since it’s an arbitrary value and logically nothing prevents us from swapping it for another. Let’s take total biomass as the criterion of greatest evolutionary success: ants, krill and fungi win. All you can do now is insist on complexity as the defining value, which comes down to your preference.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I'm sure you are misunderstanding my position. Anyway I've been confirmed.

    'narcissism'
    The influence of Marxist ideals in western society has been to put value onto everything. The State must dictate. People must not rely on their ability to reason objectively - every thought is a slippery slope to eugenics and white supremacism.


    " “Whatever works” is about the sum of it. "

    I couldn't agree more - how are you defining works?


    " this increasingly awful shitshow called civilization."

    To which people flock by the score risking life and limb.


    "My money’s on tardigrades as last animal standing."

    My point exactly. Evolutionary success need not be complex nor recent. Humans could be an evolutionary dead end; a blip.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales."

    So this is the bar for "more evolved"? An anthropogenic view of evolution and life? Looking at Man as" the end of the line"?

    "But they are more (recently) evolved"

    Cichlids are more recent.

    "That’s just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed."

    Cichlids. Anyway, you're wrong. Evolution isn't progressive. There is no "more or less evolved" species. PumpkinPerson would agree with you, but he has no idea about what evolution actually is, and it seems that you don't either since you believe it's progressive. It's not. Evolution through natural selection is based on local change. How can such a process, an elimination process, be goal-directed?

    You will never convince people like this: their starting point is narcissism. More evolved means the ability to pat ourselves on the back for this increasingly awful shitshow called civilization. Females especially cleave to this view, as they’re more dependent upon it.

    My money’s on tardigrades as last animal standing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "“More complex” is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis."

    'Complexity' may be a trend, but it's not an inevitability (Werth, 2012: 253).

    The debate about 'complexity' is about whether it is passive or driven. Most evidence points to passive.

    I would never claim it to be active. The entire point of natural selection theory is passive operation upon organisms. The opposite is elan vital. My own beloved Nietzsche couldn’t give that one up.

    Personally, I couldn’t care less about ascribing values to it all. “Whatever works” is about the sum of it.

    Helena here is a christling amateur.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    It used to puzzle me why the hero always has good luck, a narrow escape etc. Then I realised that the story of the hero only arises because that person had the good luck that resulted in them surviving to tell the tale. Just because humans evolved doesn't mean it was a sure thing and any moment we could die out and some other type of organism could start developing rapidly. Depends on the environment.

    I think I get it. Evolved mustn’t mean complex. But are humans more complex than cichlids?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marshall Lentini
    Forget complexity, since it's an arbitrary value and logically nothing prevents us from swapping it for another. Let's take total biomass as the criterion of greatest evolutionary success: ants, krill and fungi win. All you can do now is insist on complexity as the defining value, which comes down to your preference.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point."

    Source? Even then, the assertion that humans are "the newest, youngest species" is not on solid ground because the cichlids are younger.

    "Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?"

    Which traits have humans "gained more of"? You know that some scientists state that chimpanzees are "more evolved" than humans right? (nonsensical claim, each species is adapted to its niche)

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans/

    Give the two linked articles in my previous comment a read and get back to me.

    Are you implying that evolution is "progressive"?

    Are you using the term evolved to mean adapted? Knees are definitely not fit for purpose yet!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point."

    Source? Even then, the assertion that humans are "the newest, youngest species" is not on solid ground because the cichlids are younger.

    "Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?"

    Which traits have humans "gained more of"? You know that some scientists state that chimpanzees are "more evolved" than humans right? (nonsensical claim, each species is adapted to its niche)

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans/

    Give the two linked articles in my previous comment a read and get back to me.

    Are you implying that evolution is "progressive"?

    I don’t need to read anything to see that humans are more evolved than cichlids. You are introducing the term progressive. Yes evolution progresses in the sense that it is subject to the constraints of time but no it doesn’t necessarily keep going in the same direction. And no it isn’t some grand scheme to create humans. But it did! More is not qualitative it is quantitative. There is more of this stuff called evolution behind humans than behind chimps. And some of that stuff may have been undoing previous stuff. What does Cochran say?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marshall Lentini
    And before you reject an argument for sheer quantity as criterion of success, remember that you said:

    More is not qualitative it is quantitative. There is more of this stuff called evolution behind humans than behind chimps.
     
    In other words, you accept quantity as a value in determining success as a species. Perhaps only one sort of quantity is valid, in your opinion. But there we are: opinion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales."

    So this is the bar for "more evolved"? An anthropogenic view of evolution and life? Looking at Man as" the end of the line"?

    "But they are more (recently) evolved"

    Cichlids are more recent.

    "That’s just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed."

    Cichlids. Anyway, you're wrong. Evolution isn't progressive. There is no "more or less evolved" species. PumpkinPerson would agree with you, but he has no idea about what evolution actually is, and it seems that you don't either since you believe it's progressive. It's not. Evolution through natural selection is based on local change. How can such a process, an elimination process, be goal-directed?

    It used to puzzle me why the hero always has good luck, a narrow escape etc. Then I realised that the story of the hero only arises because that person had the good luck that resulted in them surviving to tell the tale. Just because humans evolved doesn’t mean it was a sure thing and any moment we could die out and some other type of organism could start developing rapidly. Depends on the environment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I think I get it. Evolved mustn't mean complex. But are humans more complex than cichlids?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point. Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?

    “Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point.”

    Source? Even then, the assertion that humans are “the newest, youngest species” is not on solid ground because the cichlids are younger.

    “Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?”

    Which traits have humans “gained more of”? You know that some scientists state that chimpanzees are “more evolved” than humans right? (nonsensical claim, each species is adapted to its niche)

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans/

    Give the two linked articles in my previous comment a read and get back to me.

    Are you implying that evolution is “progressive”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I don't need to read anything to see that humans are more evolved than cichlids. You are introducing the term progressive. Yes evolution progresses in the sense that it is subject to the constraints of time but no it doesn't necessarily keep going in the same direction. And no it isn't some grand scheme to create humans. But it did! More is not qualitative it is quantitative. There is more of this stuff called evolution behind humans than behind chimps. And some of that stuff may have been undoing previous stuff. What does Cochran say?
    , @helena
    Are you using the term evolved to mean adapted? Knees are definitely not fit for purpose yet!
    , @Talha

    Are you implying that evolution is “progressive”?
     
    Can't be..."progressive" is a loaded word and implies something purpose-driven other than optimizing survival. According to the theory - if the environmental factors demand it (another Ice Age perhaps or nuclear winter), we will ditch our intelligence for better olfactory and ocular senses and perhaps a warmer coat of fur. And we will have evolved.

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point. Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "Cichlids are more recent; starting from a less developed point."

    Source? Even then, the assertion that humans are "the newest, youngest species" is not on solid ground because the cichlids are younger.

    "Humans have developed more abilities through evolution than cichlids have. Would you like to be a cichlid?"

    Which traits have humans "gained more of"? You know that some scientists state that chimpanzees are "more evolved" than humans right? (nonsensical claim, each species is adapted to its niche)

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans/

    Give the two linked articles in my previous comment a read and get back to me.

    Are you implying that evolution is "progressive"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    Never mind what you've read, just think about it for yourself.

    Evolution has no (human) purpose and yet it still creates organisms that have more and more capabilities. So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales. Humans are not better (in fact some of them are clearly an evolutionary dead end). But they are more (recently) evolved. That's just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed.

    “So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales.”

    So this is the bar for “more evolved”? An anthropogenic view of evolution and life? Looking at Man as” the end of the line”?

    “But they are more (recently) evolved”

    Cichlids are more recent.

    “That’s just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed.”

    Cichlids. Anyway, you’re wrong. Evolution isn’t progressive. There is no “more or less evolved” species. PumpkinPerson would agree with you, but he has no idea about what evolution actually is, and it seems that you don’t either since you believe it’s progressive. It’s not. Evolution through natural selection is based on local change. How can such a process, an elimination process, be goal-directed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    It used to puzzle me why the hero always has good luck, a narrow escape etc. Then I realised that the story of the hero only arises because that person had the good luck that resulted in them surviving to tell the tale. Just because humans evolved doesn't mean it was a sure thing and any moment we could die out and some other type of organism could start developing rapidly. Depends on the environment.
    , @Marshall Lentini
    You will never convince people like this: their starting point is narcissism. More evolved means the ability to pat ourselves on the back for this increasingly awful shitshow called civilization. Females especially cleave to this view, as they're more dependent upon it.

    My money's on tardigrades as last animal standing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Is"

    Based on what criteria?

    "So what?"

    What do you mean 'so what'? If the terms have no place in evolutionary biology, then your use of the phrase to describe evolutionary processes are false.

    I've written a ton about evolutionary 'progress' and 'more and less evolved'.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/misconceptions-on-evolutionary-trees-and-more-on-evolutionary-progress/

    The term is useless.

    Never mind what you’ve read, just think about it for yourself.

    Evolution has no (human) purpose and yet it still creates organisms that have more and more capabilities. So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales. Humans are not better (in fact some of them are clearly an evolutionary dead end). But they are more (recently) evolved. That’s just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales."

    So this is the bar for "more evolved"? An anthropogenic view of evolution and life? Looking at Man as" the end of the line"?

    "But they are more (recently) evolved"

    Cichlids are more recent.

    "That’s just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed."

    Cichlids. Anyway, you're wrong. Evolution isn't progressive. There is no "more or less evolved" species. PumpkinPerson would agree with you, but he has no idea about what evolution actually is, and it seems that you don't either since you believe it's progressive. It's not. Evolution through natural selection is based on local change. How can such a process, an elimination process, be goal-directed?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Marshall Lentini
    And, of course, we split from the same stock, so cousin chimp hasn't exactly been around longer.

    "More complex" is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis.

    ““More complex” is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis.”

    ‘Complexity’ may be a trend, but it’s not an inevitability (Werth, 2012: 253).

    The debate about ‘complexity’ is about whether it is passive or driven. Most evidence points to passive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marshall Lentini
    I would never claim it to be active. The entire point of natural selection theory is passive operation upon organisms. The opposite is elan vital. My own beloved Nietzsche couldn't give that one up.

    Personally, I couldn't care less about ascribing values to it all. "Whatever works" is about the sum of it.

    Helena here is a christling amateur.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    "Actually, he is not. "

    Is

    "The terms “more” or “less evolved” have no place in evo bio."

    So what?

    “Is”

    Based on what criteria?

    “So what?”

    What do you mean ‘so what’? If the terms have no place in evolutionary biology, then your use of the phrase to describe evolutionary processes are false.

    I’ve written a ton about evolutionary ‘progress’ and ‘more and less evolved’.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/misconceptions-on-evolutionary-trees-and-more-on-evolutionary-progress/

    The term is useless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    Never mind what you've read, just think about it for yourself.

    Evolution has no (human) purpose and yet it still creates organisms that have more and more capabilities. So far only humans have created civilisation. Not elephants, not dolphins, not whales. Humans are not better (in fact some of them are clearly an evolutionary dead end). But they are more (recently) evolved. That's just a semantic and chronological fact, regardless of what Academia has decreed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Actually, he is. He doesn’t for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he’s been around longer."

    Actually, he is not. The terms "more" or "less evolved" have no place in evo bio.

    And, of course, we split from the same stock, so cousin chimp hasn’t exactly been around longer.

    “More complex” is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "“More complex” is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis."

    'Complexity' may be a trend, but it's not an inevitability (Werth, 2012: 253).

    The debate about 'complexity' is about whether it is passive or driven. Most evidence points to passive.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "Actually, he is. He doesn’t for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he’s been around longer."

    Actually, he is not. The terms "more" or "less evolved" have no place in evo bio.

    “Actually, he is not. ”

    Is

    “The terms “more” or “less evolved” have no place in evo bio.”

    So what?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "Is"

    Based on what criteria?

    "So what?"

    What do you mean 'so what'? If the terms have no place in evolutionary biology, then your use of the phrase to describe evolutionary processes are false.

    I've written a ton about evolutionary 'progress' and 'more and less evolved'.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/misconceptions-on-evolutionary-trees-and-more-on-evolutionary-progress/

    The term is useless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    "A chimpanzee is not “less evolved” than a human"

    Actually, he is. He doesn't for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he's been around longer.

    “Actually, he is. He doesn’t for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he’s been around longer.”

    Actually, he is not. The terms “more” or “less evolved” have no place in evo bio.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "Actually, he is not. "

    Is

    "The terms “more” or “less evolved” have no place in evo bio."

    So what?
    , @Marshall Lentini
    And, of course, we split from the same stock, so cousin chimp hasn't exactly been around longer.

    "More complex" is at least defensible. Huxley takes that view in The Modern Synthesis.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    [email protected]

    Not a muzzie or an SJW. I do troll on occasion (who doesnt?) but im more interested in the different perspectives of people from different cultures.

    Once I am escaping the capital, during the weekend, at least by Mon., but you are right abt. trolling, it can be fun. It was much fun on the English wikipedia, up to abt. ten years ago.

    Japanese version, not the same, I am looking it up for info. on train lines (details of history, switching, and signals) and places, occasionally history, .

    And all trolled on English WP were to deserving it!

    Aside from the doll place, I notice another place near my office, it is on the fourth floor of a narrow and nondescript building,

    Only noticed it last week. It is a stained-glass classroom. Much too small for molten glass, so I would guessimg that they work with plastic sheets. and fake stained glass, but interesting to notice that it is there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Yeahrite
    The author's comments regarding Gould are accurate but the ones directed at Franz Boas are plain character assassination.

    He wasn't against the theory of evolution, he just made the common sense argument that subjective judgements like positive vs negative or superior vs inferior have no place in science. A chimpanzee is not "less evolved" than a human, they simply evolved differently to better adapt to their enviroments, they suceeded which is the reason why they still exist.

    Same case about the human races, we're different but science refrains from making political comments regarding our differences. They merely describe those differences.

    The fact that also he references a stupid antisemite like McDonald does him no favors.

    “A chimpanzee is not “less evolved” than a human”

    Actually, he is. He doesn’t for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he’s been around longer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "Actually, he is. He doesn’t for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he’s been around longer."

    Actually, he is not. The terms "more" or "less evolved" have no place in evo bio.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The author’s comments regarding Gould are accurate but the ones directed at Franz Boas are plain character assassination.

    He wasn’t against the theory of evolution, he just made the common sense argument that subjective judgements like positive vs negative or superior vs inferior have no place in science. A chimpanzee is not “less evolved” than a human, they simply evolved differently to better adapt to their enviroments, they suceeded which is the reason why they still exist.

    Same case about the human races, we’re different but science refrains from making political comments regarding our differences. They merely describe those differences.

    The fact that also he references a stupid antisemite like McDonald does him no favors.

    Read More
    • Agree: RaceRealist88
    • Replies: @helena
    "A chimpanzee is not “less evolved” than a human"

    Actually, he is. He doesn't for example speak. But he is, also, so far, more successful. Because he's been around longer.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Che Guava
    There is a doll-making school near my main work-place. One of the actual people I work for drops by occasionally, I was on a smoke break, so showed the place, she said 'they don't look like dolls'.

    Correct. They look like people.

    I understand your feeling of phobia.

    I have an old flier from there, an invitation to come and see (after a booking). I really want to go. A matter of time. I know the usual term in English is puppet animation, but, unless on strings or propelled from below, doll animation is more correct. In Japanese, anyway, even with marionettes, they are referred to as dolls.

    As for e-mail contact, you seem sane, so fine. I have contacted writers here, not from here, but from their main sites, they always reply, I am never a pest. OTOH, I do not want to post any mail address I actually use here, too many subtle trolls, a few muzzies, SJWs.

    [email protected]

    Not a muzzie or an SJW. I do troll on occasion (who doesnt?) but im more interested in the different perspectives of people from different cultures.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Once I am escaping the capital, during the weekend, at least by Mon., but you are right abt. trolling, it can be fun. It was much fun on the English wikipedia, up to abt. ten years ago.

    Japanese version, not the same, I am looking it up for info. on train lines (details of history, switching, and signals) and places, occasionally history, .

    And all trolled on English WP were to deserving it!

    Aside from the doll place, I notice another place near my office, it is on the fourth floor of a narrow and nondescript building,

    Only noticed it last week. It is a stained-glass classroom. Much too small for molten glass, so I would guessimg that they work with plastic sheets. and fake stained glass, but interesting to notice that it is there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    You are right. It wasnt justified. The bombs dropping were a real world test that was forced on japan because the war in the europe was finished and the crazies in charge pushed it as a scare tactic to use against the USSR.

    The fire campaigns were equally awfull tho, from my point of view. Did you know the US army tested using "bat bombs"? They attatched incindeary devises to bats that had a timed trigger. The idea was that the bats would drop from a bomber in a mock bomb, it would open mid fall, and the bats would then roost in the eaves of buildings (pagados specifically, was the hope) and then the charge would go off and start a fire. Absolutely diabolical. Luckily, it backfired and burned american property, so the idea was scrapped (the bomb being finished probably had more to do with it then a few American structures burning)

    Americans like to gloss over the shit they (we) do. Its comfortable ignorance and its awful. Our culture is one of varnish and bandaids.

    Theres a scene from the book "hiroshima" that i think about quite often, where everyone gets to an island to avoid the fires devastating the city. And people are not screaming, yelling, cursing. None of it. Everyone is suffering together in silence, and its such a stark contrast to americans. Watch videos from 911 and ground zero, people that are completely uninjured are BAWLING like children who scrapped their knees. Its disgraceful. Too many Americans are a bunch of whiney bitches and when something serious happens, most break down and cry. Its a shame i share a culture with these adult children.

    You've left me with quite a bit of stuff to look into. I appreciate it. Other then the dolls. I can't stand dolls. Creepy little toys. My grandmother collected porcelain dolls, had well over 3 dozen. When i was younger and would stay with her, she had me sleep in the doll room, it was the only spare room. The lights of passing traffic coming through the window would make the dolls move and shift all night. Made my (already) overactive imagination go into hyperdrive. To this day, i still dont like their soulless eyes that seem to follow you. *shudder*

    There is a doll-making school near my main work-place. One of the actual people I work for drops by occasionally, I was on a smoke break, so showed the place, she said ‘they don’t look like dolls’.

    Correct. They look like people.

    I understand your feeling of phobia.

    I have an old flier from there, an invitation to come and see (after a booking). I really want to go. A matter of time. I know the usual term in English is puppet animation, but, unless on strings or propelled from below, doll animation is more correct. In Japanese, anyway, even with marionettes, they are referred to as dolls.

    As for e-mail contact, you seem sane, so fine. I have contacted writers here, not from here, but from their main sites, they always reply, I am never a pest. OTOH, I do not want to post any mail address I actually use here, too many subtle trolls, a few muzzies, SJWs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    [email protected]

    Not a muzzie or an SJW. I do troll on occasion (who doesnt?) but im more interested in the different perspectives of people from different cultures.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Che Guava
    There is so much off-topic in this thread, I am not feeling guilty at all.

    After the first hundred or so, nobody much reads comments, except for the few engaged in arguments, or, as with you and I, to wandering off-topic, as do many of the arguments.

    I guess I know what 'burner e-mail' means, fine, but not sure if I have much more to say on this off-topic right now, though I do but without the programmes (of the festivals) at hand right now, only a little.

    At the National Gallery of Modern Art, Film Centre, they have a fixed exhibition of Mochinaga Tadahito's works (until ), also doll animations, and good, but not those I am recalling from TV and the festival Different artist, pretty sure, but seeing the dolls with no background on the site makes it hard to be sure. Much at the festivals was amazing, both the Laputa ones and NFC ones,

    At the NFC, everything from flick-card style, dopey people, shadow-puppets, (great) ugly war-time propaganda (and only bad for China, but less ugly. post.-war, many very charming. The 1946 Ckerry Blossom is one of the most movimg films i have ever seen, much is burnt, in spots,

    I really don't know if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were worse than the firebombings of many other places.

    Sure, those with radiation sickness had a worse fate.

    At least, people near the epicentres had an instant and cruel death.

    I am tired of USA people pretending that any of it was justifiable. Little was.

    You are right. It wasnt justified. The bombs dropping were a real world test that was forced on japan because the war in the europe was finished and the crazies in charge pushed it as a scare tactic to use against the USSR.

    The fire campaigns were equally awfull tho, from my point of view. Did you know the US army tested using “bat bombs”? They attatched incindeary devises to bats that had a timed trigger. The idea was that the bats would drop from a bomber in a mock bomb, it would open mid fall, and the bats would then roost in the eaves of buildings (pagados specifically, was the hope) and then the charge would go off and start a fire. Absolutely diabolical. Luckily, it backfired and burned american property, so the idea was scrapped (the bomb being finished probably had more to do with it then a few American structures burning)

    Americans like to gloss over the shit they (we) do. Its comfortable ignorance and its awful. Our culture is one of varnish and bandaids.

    Theres a scene from the book “hiroshima” that i think about quite often, where everyone gets to an island to avoid the fires devastating the city. And people are not screaming, yelling, cursing. None of it. Everyone is suffering together in silence, and its such a stark contrast to americans. Watch videos from 911 and ground zero, people that are completely uninjured are BAWLING like children who scrapped their knees. Its disgraceful. Too many Americans are a bunch of whiney bitches and when something serious happens, most break down and cry. Its a shame i share a culture with these adult children.

    You’ve left me with quite a bit of stuff to look into. I appreciate it. Other then the dolls. I can’t stand dolls. Creepy little toys. My grandmother collected porcelain dolls, had well over 3 dozen. When i was younger and would stay with her, she had me sleep in the doll room, it was the only spare room. The lights of passing traffic coming through the window would make the dolls move and shift all night. Made my (already) overactive imagination go into hyperdrive. To this day, i still dont like their soulless eyes that seem to follow you. *shudder*

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    There is a doll-making school near my main work-place. One of the actual people I work for drops by occasionally, I was on a smoke break, so showed the place, she said 'they don't look like dolls'.

    Correct. They look like people.

    I understand your feeling of phobia.

    I have an old flier from there, an invitation to come and see (after a booking). I really want to go. A matter of time. I know the usual term in English is puppet animation, but, unless on strings or propelled from below, doll animation is more correct. In Japanese, anyway, even with marionettes, they are referred to as dolls.

    As for e-mail contact, you seem sane, so fine. I have contacted writers here, not from here, but from their main sites, they always reply, I am never a pest. OTOH, I do not want to post any mail address I actually use here, too many subtle trolls, a few muzzies, SJWs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    I would like to continue this conversation, however, it contributes nothing to this article. Is there a way to private message (im on the mobile version so i might have just overlooked it)? I'd leave my email, but i vaguely remember that its discouraged. If Its ok, I'll link a burner email so that we can continue this without clogging the comments with our (off topic) conversation.

    There is so much off-topic in this thread, I am not feeling guilty at all.

    After the first hundred or so, nobody much reads comments, except for the few engaged in arguments, or, as with you and I, to wandering off-topic, as do many of the arguments.

    I guess I know what ‘burner e-mail’ means, fine, but not sure if I have much more to say on this off-topic right now, though I do but without the programmes (of the festivals) at hand right now, only a little.

    At the National Gallery of Modern Art, Film Centre, they have a fixed exhibition of Mochinaga Tadahito’s works (until ), also doll animations, and good, but not those I am recalling from TV and the festival Different artist, pretty sure, but seeing the dolls with no background on the site makes it hard to be sure. Much at the festivals was amazing, both the Laputa ones and NFC ones,

    At the NFC, everything from flick-card style, dopey people, shadow-puppets, (great) ugly war-time propaganda (and only bad for China, but less ugly. post.-war, many very charming. The 1946 Ckerry Blossom is one of the most movimg films i have ever seen, much is burnt, in spots,

    I really don’t know if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were worse than the firebombings of many other places.

    Sure, those with radiation sickness had a worse fate.

    At least, people near the epicentres had an instant and cruel death.

    I am tired of USA people pretending that any of it was justifiable. Little was.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    You are right. It wasnt justified. The bombs dropping were a real world test that was forced on japan because the war in the europe was finished and the crazies in charge pushed it as a scare tactic to use against the USSR.

    The fire campaigns were equally awfull tho, from my point of view. Did you know the US army tested using "bat bombs"? They attatched incindeary devises to bats that had a timed trigger. The idea was that the bats would drop from a bomber in a mock bomb, it would open mid fall, and the bats would then roost in the eaves of buildings (pagados specifically, was the hope) and then the charge would go off and start a fire. Absolutely diabolical. Luckily, it backfired and burned american property, so the idea was scrapped (the bomb being finished probably had more to do with it then a few American structures burning)

    Americans like to gloss over the shit they (we) do. Its comfortable ignorance and its awful. Our culture is one of varnish and bandaids.

    Theres a scene from the book "hiroshima" that i think about quite often, where everyone gets to an island to avoid the fires devastating the city. And people are not screaming, yelling, cursing. None of it. Everyone is suffering together in silence, and its such a stark contrast to americans. Watch videos from 911 and ground zero, people that are completely uninjured are BAWLING like children who scrapped their knees. Its disgraceful. Too many Americans are a bunch of whiney bitches and when something serious happens, most break down and cry. Its a shame i share a culture with these adult children.

    You've left me with quite a bit of stuff to look into. I appreciate it. Other then the dolls. I can't stand dolls. Creepy little toys. My grandmother collected porcelain dolls, had well over 3 dozen. When i was younger and would stay with her, she had me sleep in the doll room, it was the only spare room. The lights of passing traffic coming through the window would make the dolls move and shift all night. Made my (already) overactive imagination go into hyperdrive. To this day, i still dont like their soulless eyes that seem to follow you. *shudder*
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • OK, white people are Neanderthal.
    This guy talks a lot about Europe. In many ways, the East Asians, part Denisovan, are brighter than Europeans, standing in relation to Europeans as Europeans to Africans. What of this?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Che Guava
    For USSR, Yuri Norshtein is very good. I have a collected works DVD, some is propaganda, very stylish, but also children's (or all-ages works for the less cynical or brain-dead). They are great.

    Chebrashika is wonderful, children love it.

    A small independent cinema, five stations away, shaped like something out of Ghibli and named Laputa (which is funny, because when Swift used it in G's Travels, I am sure that he meant it to mean la puta, 'the bitch'), they used to run an international animation festival, but it has shrunk (multiple venues years ago, then only there, last couple of times I checked, not held). I still have the programme lists, but I don't know where they are in the boxes at my storage box. Lots from the former Warsaw Pact, particularly the places I already mentioned.

    So I can't offer as many titles and studio names as I would like.

    There was a man here who made really beautiful and touching doll animations, will find his name from old Web pages in the next couple of days and advise you.

    Live-action Cutie Honey was great, kept the feel of the animations, totally unlike the overblown Marvel/DC crap (well, most are crap, and sure not good for children).

    The animations, also generally good.

    I would like to continue this conversation, however, it contributes nothing to this article. Is there a way to private message (im on the mobile version so i might have just overlooked it)? I’d leave my email, but i vaguely remember that its discouraged. If Its ok, I’ll link a burner email so that we can continue this without clogging the comments with our (off topic) conversation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    There is so much off-topic in this thread, I am not feeling guilty at all.

    After the first hundred or so, nobody much reads comments, except for the few engaged in arguments, or, as with you and I, to wandering off-topic, as do many of the arguments.

    I guess I know what 'burner e-mail' means, fine, but not sure if I have much more to say on this off-topic right now, though I do but without the programmes (of the festivals) at hand right now, only a little.

    At the National Gallery of Modern Art, Film Centre, they have a fixed exhibition of Mochinaga Tadahito's works (until ), also doll animations, and good, but not those I am recalling from TV and the festival Different artist, pretty sure, but seeing the dolls with no background on the site makes it hard to be sure. Much at the festivals was amazing, both the Laputa ones and NFC ones,

    At the NFC, everything from flick-card style, dopey people, shadow-puppets, (great) ugly war-time propaganda (and only bad for China, but less ugly. post.-war, many very charming. The 1946 Ckerry Blossom is one of the most movimg films i have ever seen, much is burnt, in spots,

    I really don't know if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were worse than the firebombings of many other places.

    Sure, those with radiation sickness had a worse fate.

    At least, people near the epicentres had an instant and cruel death.

    I am tired of USA people pretending that any of it was justifiable. Little was.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.
     
    No, it isn't.

    “No, it isn’t.”

    Well,”isn’t” implies you didnt even bother to look. So you have no idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous

    Evolution is god, maths is god – things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.
     
    No, evolution is not "God", even metaphorically. Yes, it is a process, in a sense, because its effects become apparent over time. Mostly, however, it is a functional paradigm, tied to human perception of what humans call "order, harmony, knowledge and structure."

    There is a bit of a tendency to inflate the significance of evolution by modeling it as a sort of ascending Hegelian spiral -- out of the swamps and ever-rising in complexity and grandeur. To the stars, to Glory, to a reach for perfection, etc. etc.

    Not really. Evolution is just adaptive survival, with a bit of mutation thrown in. Just call mutation what it is -- change. Maybe that change will improve the survival rate of some life form, maybe not. That change does not promise improvement in any sense other than reproductive success. If environmental factors change, the next adaptive change may make the organism uglier, slower, fatter, prone to gas, and having very little sense of humor. But, for better or for worse, it survives to reproduce, That's evolution.

    “There is a bit of a tendency to inflate the significance of evolution by modeling it as a sort of ascending Hegelian spiral — out of the swamps and ever-rising in complexity and grandeur. To the stars, to Glory, to a reach for perfection, etc. etc.”

    from dictionary “Teleology is the philosophical attempt to describe things in terms of their apparent purpose, directive principle, or goal. A purpose that is imposed by a human use …”

    Evolution is a happy coincidence. What works, continues. I’m not a philosophy graduate but surely the only possibility is that life becomes more complex because the process is cumulative – up until the point when something interferes with the process, say for example humans started giving birth to less developed children more than they gave birth to fully developed children.

    But just because life becomes more complex, doesn’t require the complexity to be purposeful. Humans look at the complexity and think there must be a purpose; probably because humans like to have a purpose to what they do.

    As for God, it just seems silly that people can conceive of God designing animals but they can’t conceive of God designing a self-organising process. That seems rather to belittle God.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    (i tried posting this the other day, but it just wouldn't go thru.)

    I had no idea animation flourished in the USSR, propaganda in the west made russia seem like a very gloom, unfun place with no joy of any kind, except vodka. I will have to do some research into this.

    Astroboy is good (from what i remember from when i was a kid) and ghost in the shell is my all time favorite anime, the series more so then the movie, only because there is much more material.

    Gainax (im not sure if thats the actual name of the studio, they did FLCL, and are the people who made cutie honey (if the quick youtube video i saw was right)) has done several animes i enjoyed. I really am a sucker for robots and mechs so the gundam series has always been one of my favorites as well.

    Ive never heard of cutie honey and i just looked up the show on youtube. Wow lol could be interesting. reminds me of power rangers. ( you are right, erika sato is a stunner)

    For USSR, Yuri Norshtein is very good. I have a collected works DVD, some is propaganda, very stylish, but also children’s (or all-ages works for the less cynical or brain-dead). They are great.

    Chebrashika is wonderful, children love it.

    A small independent cinema, five stations away, shaped like something out of Ghibli and named Laputa (which is funny, because when Swift used it in G’s Travels, I am sure that he meant it to mean la puta, ‘the bitch’), they used to run an international animation festival, but it has shrunk (multiple venues years ago, then only there, last couple of times I checked, not held). I still have the programme lists, but I don’t know where they are in the boxes at my storage box. Lots from the former Warsaw Pact, particularly the places I already mentioned.

    So I can’t offer as many titles and studio names as I would like.

    There was a man here who made really beautiful and touching doll animations, will find his name from old Web pages in the next couple of days and advise you.

    Live-action Cutie Honey was great, kept the feel of the animations, totally unlike the overblown Marvel/DC crap (well, most are crap, and sure not good for children).

    The animations, also generally good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    I would like to continue this conversation, however, it contributes nothing to this article. Is there a way to private message (im on the mobile version so i might have just overlooked it)? I'd leave my email, but i vaguely remember that its discouraged. If Its ok, I'll link a burner email so that we can continue this without clogging the comments with our (off topic) conversation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @LauraMR
    You misunderstand my observations regarding race. I only say it is not real because of how it is here usually defined and elsewhere often postulated.

    Bring forth a theory of race whose fundamental assumptions are hybridity/mongrelism and I might take it seriously.

    However, any assertion that couples "purity" and "race" will continue to remain spurious (to me) considering that, for example, we are not even a "pure" branch of the homo genus.

    I’m not sure there are too many on the right genuinely worried about purity anymore, beyond the usual autistic hairsplitting over Italians, “crypto-Jews”, and half-Asians. (You’ll note I have the misfortune of belonging to one these undesirable classes.) These days, as a famous German ballad goes, es geht nun um’s nackte Überleben.

    But usually behind this sort of reserve is not an affronted scientific integrity, as you seem to suggest, but the argument that goes “since hybridity is as old as bipedalism, you have no grounds for opposing immigration, or saying that being white is better than being black,” etc.

    Maybe that isn’t you. Maybe those other hominids fought back and were considered backward half-wits for resisting the diversity of their day. Maybe at this point I’d rather have been born black – or worse: in Ohio – so I wouldn’t be drawn into idle whiteskin hairsplitting like this.

    In any case, you’re working backward from a scientifically advanced perspective of gradients (in this case of hybrids or subspecies) to the primordial linguistic convenience that posits perfectly distinct entities on the basis of observable differences, and judging this habit imperfect. Of course it is. So what?

    So absolute purity doesn’t exist: does this mean the proverbial white übermensch must agree that the builders of the proverbial grass huts are as smart as he is? have you come up with some definitive criterion for when an isolated population is allowed to consider itself distinct from others and risk the woefully subjective estimation of “purity”?

    I mean everyone with a basic grasp of natural selection knows classification is fuzzy and can be followed back straight to the eukaryotes, that dividing lines are arbitrary in spite of the basic reliance on factors like time, geography, mutation loads etc. in determining that there are “species” and “races” instead of the extreme linguistic inconvenience of this one thing that looks one way but is really a hybrid of this and that etc. Again, so what? Linguistic relativism may affect to abolish measurable groups, but those groups just stubbornly keep existing, fuzzy boundaries aside.

    Hey, I get it. I frequently define myself against the crude and opportunistic mishandling of theory that goes on in these quarters. But even though purity is relative, we exist in such a way that to posit absolute qualities like purity – based on real qualities – is probably slightly more adaptive as far as the one doing the positing than mulling over the hybrid nature of everything. Do you have children?

    Then again, it’s usually the vapid white girls chirping “I’m just a mutt!” who do have them ….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @helena
    "I became a Christian, because, intellectually, there is simply no other choice."

    As an ideology it's the most workable on offer.

    God and Devil do exist but they are human labels for the way we experience the world; they are not literal discrete entities.

    Evolution is god, maths is god - things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.

    But the rising tide of leftism is a plan. A plan held by a few people who think they are god. And the devil is in the detail. That's why they talk about 'having the conversation' - there's only one right way for the conversation to go and when it finally does, the left can 'shut down debate' (to quote a lib-left broadcaster). And young people are showing signs of leaning towards this seemingly benevolent dictatorship style. So much easier. Very scary.

    Evolution is god, maths is god – things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.

    No, evolution is not “God”, even metaphorically. Yes, it is a process, in a sense, because its effects become apparent over time. Mostly, however, it is a functional paradigm, tied to human perception of what humans call “order, harmony, knowledge and structure.”

    There is a bit of a tendency to inflate the significance of evolution by modeling it as a sort of ascending Hegelian spiral — out of the swamps and ever-rising in complexity and grandeur. To the stars, to Glory, to a reach for perfection, etc. etc.

    Not really. Evolution is just adaptive survival, with a bit of mutation thrown in. Just call mutation what it is — change. Maybe that change will improve the survival rate of some life form, maybe not. That change does not promise improvement in any sense other than reproductive success. If environmental factors change, the next adaptive change may make the organism uglier, slower, fatter, prone to gas, and having very little sense of humor. But, for better or for worse, it survives to reproduce, That’s evolution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "There is a bit of a tendency to inflate the significance of evolution by modeling it as a sort of ascending Hegelian spiral — out of the swamps and ever-rising in complexity and grandeur. To the stars, to Glory, to a reach for perfection, etc. etc."

    from dictionary "Teleology is the philosophical attempt to describe things in terms of their apparent purpose, directive principle, or goal. A purpose that is imposed by a human use ..."

    Evolution is a happy coincidence. What works, continues. I'm not a philosophy graduate but surely the only possibility is that life becomes more complex because the process is cumulative - up until the point when something interferes with the process, say for example humans started giving birth to less developed children more than they gave birth to fully developed children.

    But just because life becomes more complex, doesn't require the complexity to be purposeful. Humans look at the complexity and think there must be a purpose; probably because humans like to have a purpose to what they do.

    As for God, it just seems silly that people can conceive of God designing animals but they can't conceive of God designing a self-organising process. That seems rather to belittle God.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    (ive left this comment close to a dozen times now, its lost some of eloquence in that many rewrites lol. I dont know why it wont post)

    What you describe is the natural process. Crispr can use an expanded library of genes to pick and choose what genes to add and remove from the target. If you are interested, check out this ted talk. Its about "designer babies" and how it can quickly spiral out of control.

    I dont think i can link the video

    Search ted talk and designer baby on youtube.

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.

    No, it isn’t.

    Read More
    • LOL: Delinquent Snail
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    "No, it isn’t."

    Well,"isn't" implies you didnt even bother to look. So you have no idea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Che Guava
    Also, for children, Chubrashika, a ragged teddy bear, it has many late USSR themes (he tries to join the Young Pioneers), but no heavy politics in all but one episode. Also very charming, remains popular in Russia and Japan, like Kin Dza Dza.

    (i tried posting this the other day, but it just wouldn’t go thru.)

    I had no idea animation flourished in the USSR, propaganda in the west made russia seem like a very gloom, unfun place with no joy of any kind, except vodka. I will have to do some research into this.

    Astroboy is good (from what i remember from when i was a kid) and ghost in the shell is my all time favorite anime, the series more so then the movie, only because there is much more material.

    Gainax (im not sure if thats the actual name of the studio, they did FLCL, and are the people who made cutie honey (if the quick youtube video i saw was right)) has done several animes i enjoyed. I really am a sucker for robots and mechs so the gundam series has always been one of my favorites as well.

    Ive never heard of cutie honey and i just looked up the show on youtube. Wow lol could be interesting. reminds me of power rangers. ( you are right, erika sato is a stunner)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    For USSR, Yuri Norshtein is very good. I have a collected works DVD, some is propaganda, very stylish, but also children's (or all-ages works for the less cynical or brain-dead). They are great.

    Chebrashika is wonderful, children love it.

    A small independent cinema, five stations away, shaped like something out of Ghibli and named Laputa (which is funny, because when Swift used it in G's Travels, I am sure that he meant it to mean la puta, 'the bitch'), they used to run an international animation festival, but it has shrunk (multiple venues years ago, then only there, last couple of times I checked, not held). I still have the programme lists, but I don't know where they are in the boxes at my storage box. Lots from the former Warsaw Pact, particularly the places I already mentioned.

    So I can't offer as many titles and studio names as I would like.

    There was a man here who made really beautiful and touching doll animations, will find his name from old Web pages in the next couple of days and advise you.

    Live-action Cutie Honey was great, kept the feel of the animations, totally unlike the overblown Marvel/DC crap (well, most are crap, and sure not good for children).

    The animations, also generally good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    Humans kill other humans based on skin color. You think we would have a problem killing a race of pygmies, or giants, or any other species? There is evidence of other early human species. The pygmies of africa are still in existence. There were pygmies in the south pacific.

    As for their still being apes, we just arn't as thorough as we want to be.

    Also, for children, Chubrashika, a ragged teddy bear, it has many late USSR themes (he tries to join the Young Pioneers), but no heavy politics in all but one episode. Also very charming, remains popular in Russia and Japan, like Kin Dza Dza.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    (i tried posting this the other day, but it just wouldn't go thru.)

    I had no idea animation flourished in the USSR, propaganda in the west made russia seem like a very gloom, unfun place with no joy of any kind, except vodka. I will have to do some research into this.

    Astroboy is good (from what i remember from when i was a kid) and ghost in the shell is my all time favorite anime, the series more so then the movie, only because there is much more material.

    Gainax (im not sure if thats the actual name of the studio, they did FLCL, and are the people who made cutie honey (if the quick youtube video i saw was right)) has done several animes i enjoyed. I really am a sucker for robots and mechs so the gundam series has always been one of my favorites as well.

    Ive never heard of cutie honey and i just looked up the show on youtube. Wow lol could be interesting. reminds me of power rangers. ( you are right, erika sato is a stunner)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth

    @Truth
    Better yet, why dont you put down the “good book” (lol) and read a few books from people that put logic and deductive reasoning above blind faith.
     
    My friend, I am truly not picking on you, but let's analyze this statement. You are lauding "logic and deductive reasoning" while yesterday, you stated that you do not believe that NASA physicists, aka; the world's best scientists, can reproduce 1960's research.

    You strike me as a young guy, and I was once a young guy. I thought that I knew everything and as I said earlier, can carry out the creationist argument better than anyone here, and probably better than anyone you know. This is not bragging, it is most likely fact.

    25 years of atheism led me to Zen which taught me to think; use logic and deductive reasoning, as you wrote above, but the thing about Zen is that it tells you to disregard that which is not logical and does not work for you, so I did.

    I became a Christian, because, intellectually, there is simply no other choice. I understand the "opiate for the masses" comment you posted above, and MADE the argument for many years. If you think critically about why a book has been so influential for 1800 years now, above any other book, you will probably reason that there must be something to it. One of my favorite quotes is, "The Devil's greatest trick was convincing the world he does not exist." It is incredibly prophetic. He has convinced you, and had me convinced for well over 40 years, at this point, there simply is not one sliver of doubt in my mind that there is a devil, and therefore, there must be a God.

    But it is not

    “I became a Christian, because, intellectually, there is simply no other choice.”

    As an ideology it’s the most workable on offer.

    God and Devil do exist but they are human labels for the way we experience the world; they are not literal discrete entities.

    Evolution is god, maths is god – things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.

    But the rising tide of leftism is a plan. A plan held by a few people who think they are god. And the devil is in the detail. That’s why they talk about ‘having the conversation’ – there’s only one right way for the conversation to go and when it finally does, the left can ‘shut down debate’ (to quote a lib-left broadcaster). And young people are showing signs of leaning towards this seemingly benevolent dictatorship style. So much easier. Very scary.

    Read More
    • Agree: Delinquent Snail
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Evolution is god, maths is god – things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.
     
    No, evolution is not "God", even metaphorically. Yes, it is a process, in a sense, because its effects become apparent over time. Mostly, however, it is a functional paradigm, tied to human perception of what humans call "order, harmony, knowledge and structure."

    There is a bit of a tendency to inflate the significance of evolution by modeling it as a sort of ascending Hegelian spiral -- out of the swamps and ever-rising in complexity and grandeur. To the stars, to Glory, to a reach for perfection, etc. etc.

    Not really. Evolution is just adaptive survival, with a bit of mutation thrown in. Just call mutation what it is -- change. Maybe that change will improve the survival rate of some life form, maybe not. That change does not promise improvement in any sense other than reproductive success. If environmental factors change, the next adaptive change may make the organism uglier, slower, fatter, prone to gas, and having very little sense of humor. But, for better or for worse, it survives to reproduce, That's evolution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.

  • Better yet, why dont you put down the “good book” (lol) and read a few books from people that put logic and deductive reasoning above blind faith.

    My friend, I am truly not picking on you, but let’s analyze this statement. You are lauding “logic and deductive reasoning” while yesterday, you stated that you do not believe that NASA physicists, aka; the world’s best scientists, can reproduce 1960′s research.

    You strike me as a young guy, and I was once a young guy. I thought that I knew everything and as I said earlier, can carry out the creationist argument better than anyone here, and probably better than anyone you know. This is not bragging, it is most likely fact.

    25 years of atheism led me to Zen which taught me to think; use logic and deductive reasoning, as you wrote above, but the thing about Zen is that it tells you to disregard that which is not logical and does not work for you, so I did.

    I became a Christian, because, intellectually, there is simply no other choice. I understand the “opiate for the masses” comment you posted above, and MADE the argument for many years. If you think critically about why a book has been so influential for 1800 years now, above any other book, you will probably reason that there must be something to it. One of my favorite quotes is, “The Devil’s greatest trick was convincing the world he does not exist.” It is incredibly prophetic. He has convinced you, and had me convinced for well over 40 years, at this point, there simply is not one sliver of doubt in my mind that there is a devil, and therefore, there must be a God.

    But it is not

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "I became a Christian, because, intellectually, there is simply no other choice."

    As an ideology it's the most workable on offer.

    God and Devil do exist but they are human labels for the way we experience the world; they are not literal discrete entities.

    Evolution is god, maths is god - things so complex and difficult to understand and yet which contain within them processes and relationships that create order, harmony, knowledge and structure.

    But the rising tide of leftism is a plan. A plan held by a few people who think they are god. And the devil is in the detail. That's why they talk about 'having the conversation' - there's only one right way for the conversation to go and when it finally does, the left can 'shut down debate' (to quote a lib-left broadcaster). And young people are showing signs of leaning towards this seemingly benevolent dictatorship style. So much easier. Very scary.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    I had a look at this http://www.icr.org/article/6491/372/.

    He doesn't understand that the specific missing link doesn't need to be found. That's the beauty of what Darwin did - he ventured a theory about a process .

    It's not a prize crossword that you can't submit because there's one clue you can't get.

    We've all got the prize.

    “He doesn’t understand that the specific missing link doesn’t need to be found.”

    He doesn’t understand that the “missing link” is medieval garbage. Scientists aren’t looking for a “mission link”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    From your link:

    How could billions of DNA differences have evolved in just four million years? It's impossible.7 Humans and chimpanzees were distinctly and uniquely created after all.

    “How could billions of DNA differences have evolved in just four million years?”

    God knows.
    Don’t lose the faith, his works are truly wondrous to behold.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    Read Titus 1:14 and you will understand your problem.

    Better yet, why dont you put down the “good book” (lol) and read a few books from people that put logic and deductive reasoning above blind faith. You will quickly see that christianity, and most, if not all, religions, are bogus. They are a construct to keep unruly masses in line. And the best way to do that, is to threaten the people with eternal pain and suffering if they dont follow the societal norms of the time.

    Why do you think there are specific words to discredit anyone that asks critical questions about the stories? Why do you think people are prosecuted and tortured to “convert”?

    If the story or event cant handle simple questions being leveled against it, or immediately shuts down any critacal discussion, chances are high its BS.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    I had a look at this http://www.icr.org/article/6491/372/.

    He doesn't understand that the specific missing link doesn't need to be found. That's the beauty of what Darwin did - he ventured a theory about a process .

    It's not a prize crossword that you can't submit because there's one clue you can't get.

    We've all got the prize.

    From your link:

    How could billions of DNA differences have evolved in just four million years? It’s impossible.7 Humans and chimpanzees were distinctly and uniquely created after all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "How could billions of DNA differences have evolved in just four million years?"

    God knows.
    Don't lose the faith, his works are truly wondrous to behold.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    A book re written from previou books that were rewritten from previous versions of random personal testimonies just so a monarch could divorce his wife is a terrible "proof".

    Your line of argument is just pathetic.

    Read Titus 1:14 and you will understand your problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    Better yet, why dont you put down the "good book" (lol) and read a few books from people that put logic and deductive reasoning above blind faith. You will quickly see that christianity, and most, if not all, religions, are bogus. They are a construct to keep unruly masses in line. And the best way to do that, is to threaten the people with eternal pain and suffering if they dont follow the societal norms of the time.

    Why do you think there are specific words to discredit anyone that asks critical questions about the stories? Why do you think people are prosecuted and tortured to "convert"?

    If the story or event cant handle simple questions being leveled against it, or immediately shuts down any critacal discussion, chances are high its BS.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous

    We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the “normies”.
     
    Very unlikely. Adaptive mutations are vanishingly rare -- 0.001%. Take a separation evolutionarily very big, like Neandertals and Cro-Mags (or equivalent -- pick your homo variant). Very little actual conflict, and that was a major sub-species break. It was once suggested the Cro-Mag killed off the Neandertals, but more modern research suggests they were wiped out by disease to which Cro-Mag could acquire immunity.

    Furthermore, adaptive mutations have to breed true back to existing populations, because it's not like all of a sudden every female drops a homo superior infant. The mutation must be genetically dominant, or it dies out immediately.

    (ive left this comment close to a dozen times now, its lost some of eloquence in that many rewrites lol. I dont know why it wont post)

    What you describe is the natural process. Crispr can use an expanded library of genes to pick and choose what genes to add and remove from the target. If you are interested, check out this ted talk. Its about “designer babies” and how it can quickly spiral out of control.

    I dont think i can link the video

    Search ted talk and designer baby on youtube.

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.
     
    No, it isn't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    OK, if you insist, I'll play semantically stupid....

    "Then where (sigh) is the common (here we go again) ancestor, (man do I get tired of repeating this) because they ain't walkin' around today, nor have we (you can fill in the end here) found any remains.

    I had a look at this http://www.icr.org/article/6491/372/.

    He doesn’t understand that the specific missing link doesn’t need to be found. That’s the beauty of what Darwin did – he ventured a theory about a process .

    It’s not a prize crossword that you can’t submit because there’s one clue you can’t get.

    We’ve all got the prize.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    From your link:

    How could billions of DNA differences have evolved in just four million years? It's impossible.7 Humans and chimpanzees were distinctly and uniquely created after all.
    , @RaceRealist88
    "He doesn’t understand that the specific missing link doesn’t need to be found."

    He doesn't understand that the "missing link" is medieval garbage. Scientists aren't looking for a "mission link".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth

    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
     
    BEHOLD! TRUTHOLIO HAS DECIPHERED FOR YOU PUNY, AND UNWORTHY HUMANS THE GREAT, AND MYSTERIOUS PLAN!!!...*

    https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/


    *actually, I had a copy sitting in my briefcase and I found this one on Google, but if you want to look at me as your sovereign and grand commander, I will get used to it.

    A book re written from previou books that were rewritten from previous versions of random personal testimonies just so a monarch could divorce his wife is a terrible “proof”.

    Your line of argument is just pathetic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Read Titus 1:14 and you will understand your problem.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth

    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
     
    BEHOLD! TRUTHOLIO HAS DECIPHERED FOR YOU PUNY, AND UNWORTHY HUMANS THE GREAT, AND MYSTERIOUS PLAN!!!...*

    https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/


    *actually, I had a copy sitting in my briefcase and I found this one on Google, but if you want to look at me as your sovereign and grand commander, I will get used to it.

    Ha ha. I love Anglican humour.

    Only this year I saw an original first edition, in the flesh. Lucky me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees"

    We share a common ancestor, we are not descended from Chimpanzees.

    OK, if you insist, I’ll play semantically stupid….

    “Then where (sigh) is the common (here we go again) ancestor, (man do I get tired of repeating this) because they ain’t walkin’ around today, nor have we (you can fill in the end here) found any remains.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I had a look at this http://www.icr.org/article/6491/372/.

    He doesn't understand that the specific missing link doesn't need to be found. That's the beauty of what Darwin did - he ventured a theory about a process .

    It's not a prize crossword that you can't submit because there's one clue you can't get.

    We've all got the prize.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    A. In the year 2017 there are humans
    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees
    C. I have personally witnessed both
    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
    G. This leads me to believe that no plans were made for living things

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.

    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one

    BEHOLD! TRUTHOLIO HAS DECIPHERED FOR YOU PUNY, AND UNWORTHY HUMANS THE GREAT, AND MYSTERIOUS PLAN!!!…*

    https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

    *actually, I had a copy sitting in my briefcase and I found this one on Google, but if you want to look at me as your sovereign and grand commander, I will get used to it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    Ha ha. I love Anglican humour.

    Only this year I saw an original first edition, in the flesh. Lucky me.

    , @Delinquent Snail
    A book re written from previou books that were rewritten from previous versions of random personal testimonies just so a monarch could divorce his wife is a terrible "proof".

    Your line of argument is just pathetic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    I'm not sure this is really controversial:

    A. In the year 2017 there are humans

    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees

    C. I have personally witnessed both

    D. According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees

    E. There should be chimpumans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of chimpumans

    F. There are no chimpumans, and no scientist has EVER found one

    G. This leads me to believe that humans do not share a common relative with chimpanzees

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.

    “According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees”

    We share a common ancestor, we are not descended from Chimpanzees.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    OK, if you insist, I'll play semantically stupid....

    "Then where (sigh) is the common (here we go again) ancestor, (man do I get tired of repeating this) because they ain't walkin' around today, nor have we (you can fill in the end here) found any remains.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    I'm not sure this is really controversial:

    A. In the year 2017 there are humans

    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees

    C. I have personally witnessed both

    D. According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees

    E. There should be chimpumans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of chimpumans

    F. There are no chimpumans, and no scientist has EVER found one

    G. This leads me to believe that humans do not share a common relative with chimpanzees

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.

    A. In the year 2017 there are humans
    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees
    C. I have personally witnessed both
    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
    G. This leads me to believe that no plans were made for living things

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
     
    BEHOLD! TRUTHOLIO HAS DECIPHERED FOR YOU PUNY, AND UNWORTHY HUMANS THE GREAT, AND MYSTERIOUS PLAN!!!...*

    https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/


    *actually, I had a copy sitting in my briefcase and I found this one on Google, but if you want to look at me as your sovereign and grand commander, I will get used to it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @helena
    What's the alternative - that every plant and animal and microorganism has an individual design plan? That's a lot of plans, where are they? Let me know when you've found one.

    I’m not sure this is really controversial:

    A. In the year 2017 there are humans

    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees

    C. I have personally witnessed both

    D. According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees

    E. There should be chimpumans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of chimpumans

    F. There are no chimpumans, and no scientist has EVER found one

    G. This leads me to believe that humans do not share a common relative with chimpanzees

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    A. In the year 2017 there are humans
    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees
    C. I have personally witnessed both
    D. According to some, humans are a unique design that came out of nowhere, and so are chimpanzees, and every other living thing
    E. There should be design plans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of plans
    F. There are no plans, and no scientist has EVER found one
    G. This leads me to believe that no plans were made for living things

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.
    , @RaceRealist88
    "According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees"

    We share a common ancestor, we are not descended from Chimpanzees.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    Well great; let me know when they find remains of the common ancestor" (aka: Missing link) because to the best of my knowledge, they have not and have been looking for two centuries.

    What’s the alternative – that every plant and animal and microorganism has an individual design plan? That’s a lot of plans, where are they? Let me know when you’ve found one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    I'm not sure this is really controversial:

    A. In the year 2017 there are humans

    B. In the year 2017 there are chimpanzees

    C. I have personally witnessed both

    D. According to some, humans are descended from chimpanzees

    E. There should be chimpumans or in the LEAST strange scenario, the remains of chimpumans

    F. There are no chimpumans, and no scientist has EVER found one

    G. This leads me to believe that humans do not share a common relative with chimpanzees

    A fairly straightforward logical syllogism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    "Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?"

    I have though that also. They still seem to have a (to have preserved much of a) Mediterranean wine culture (such as that has traditionally existed/exists in the Mediterranean parts of Europe—esp the East Mediterranean—including the pre-Islamic Middle East. They drink small amounts (of wine usually) with meals, not do not typically traditionally "binge"—so t0 speak—or drink large amounts recreationally, or at once, as Northern Europeans sometimes seem to do.

    I enjoyed your discussion to date. Fascinating.
    A few years ago I tried to interest myself in this area, but events overtook me. My rather raw interest at the time was piqued by this man’s writings: http://www.michaelbradley.info

    Are either of you familiar with him? Is he worth the candle, or has his thesis been gainsaid?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    As a side comment, nasa recently pushed the revisionist history movie about a black lady that saved the day when the scientist and engineers that made the systems couldnt solve a few math problems.

    Their choice of representatives could clearly use some improvements.

    Glib response, but somewhat cliche and not particularly satisfying.

    Read More
    • LOL: Delinquent Snail
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    It was a COMMON ANCESTOR to both humans and apes. That COMMON ANCESTOR became human, chimp and probably a few other species. Humans and chimps just adapted better.

    Just like how HUMANS and DOGS have a common ancestor. Its a lot further back in time, but we came from the same rodent.

    Well great; let me know when they find remains of the common ancestor” (aka: Missing link) because to the best of my knowledge, they have not and have been looking for two centuries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    What's the alternative - that every plant and animal and microorganism has an individual design plan? That's a lot of plans, where are they? Let me know when you've found one.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Delinquent Snail
    Crisper is kind of scary. We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the "normies". Or we could fuck something up real bad and permently damage something that doesnt become apparent for a generation or 2, like making people less susceptible to cancer but it causes serious defects in the offspring. Who knows?

    It could be used for all kinds of amazing things. Make a genetic variant of current humans that are suited to deep space or remove diseases and physical deformities.

    Knowing humans tho, we wont use it for good. Look at nuclear power for a fine example. We have the ability to power our planet safely for generations, yet we would rather use it to decimate huge areas and poison other groups.

    We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the “normies”.

    Very unlikely. Adaptive mutations are vanishingly rare — 0.001%. Take a separation evolutionarily very big, like Neandertals and Cro-Mags (or equivalent — pick your homo variant). Very little actual conflict, and that was a major sub-species break. It was once suggested the Cro-Mag killed off the Neandertals, but more modern research suggests they were wiped out by disease to which Cro-Mag could acquire immunity.

    Furthermore, adaptive mutations have to breed true back to existing populations, because it’s not like all of a sudden every female drops a homo superior infant. The mutation must be genetically dominant, or it dies out immediately.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    (ive left this comment close to a dozen times now, its lost some of eloquence in that many rewrites lol. I dont know why it wont post)

    What you describe is the natural process. Crispr can use an expanded library of genes to pick and choose what genes to add and remove from the target. If you are interested, check out this ted talk. Its about "designer babies" and how it can quickly spiral out of control.

    I dont think i can link the video

    Search ted talk and designer baby on youtube.

    Its well worth the search and the time to watch.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; “OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more “human” whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs”. Is that how it worked?"

    This is so funny.

    Yes organisms "have a choice" in whether they evolve or not by passing their genes to the next generation. But not a conscious "choice" (unless we're talking about humans today I'm the CRISPR/CAS9 age) like "I'm going to evolve into this because of this".

    Read some Richard Dawkins and then comment again if you're still finding it hard to grasp.

    Crisper is kind of scary. We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the “normies”. Or we could fuck something up real bad and permently damage something that doesnt become apparent for a generation or 2, like making people less susceptible to cancer but it causes serious defects in the offspring. Who knows?

    It could be used for all kinds of amazing things. Make a genetic variant of current humans that are suited to deep space or remove diseases and physical deformities.

    Knowing humans tho, we wont use it for good. Look at nuclear power for a fine example. We have the ability to power our planet safely for generations, yet we would rather use it to decimate huge areas and poison other groups.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the “normies”.
     
    Very unlikely. Adaptive mutations are vanishingly rare -- 0.001%. Take a separation evolutionarily very big, like Neandertals and Cro-Mags (or equivalent -- pick your homo variant). Very little actual conflict, and that was a major sub-species break. It was once suggested the Cro-Mag killed off the Neandertals, but more modern research suggests they were wiped out by disease to which Cro-Mag could acquire immunity.

    Furthermore, adaptive mutations have to breed true back to existing populations, because it's not like all of a sudden every female drops a homo superior infant. The mutation must be genetically dominant, or it dies out immediately.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    First of all, this official representative of NASA has said, he would love to go back to the moon.

    So the guy that NASA officials HAVE CHOSEN TO BE THE SPOKESMAN, and has a PhD in Chemical Engineering, and has been an Astro-naught for 21 years, is "senile"?!?

    And in an age in which we have self driving cars and more computing power in our cell-phones than the moon mission folks had in a room, we have "lost the tools to get us there" and cannot re-create them?!?!

    And these supposedly brilliant Nazi Scientists never wrote anything down? They never kept a record of what they were doing? They did all of those calculations IN THEIR HEADS?!?!?!

    And it is too complicated to get to the moon, because we do not have the technology (any more) but we are now working on a plan TO GO TO MARS?!?!

    I mean, think about what you wrote here for a second. Am I actually understanding your position or did I miss something?

    You are, in my estimation making these arguments from a position of pure scientific logic, correct?

    As a side comment, nasa recently pushed the revisionist history movie about a black lady that saved the day when the scientist and engineers that made the systems couldnt solve a few math problems.

    Their choice of representatives could clearly use some improvements.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Glib response, but somewhat cliche and not particularly satisfying.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    But the question remains; "If apes evolved into humans, why are there still apes"?

    Obviously at some point you had two apes, one's lineage went toward human, the other's stayed Simian, my simple questions are, how? and why?

    Did one eat different bananas, drink different spring water? Did the albino apes not want to associate anymore with the black ones in the tribe, what?

    (BTW; "I don't know" is a suitable response).

    It was a COMMON ANCESTOR to both humans and apes. That COMMON ANCESTOR became human, chimp and probably a few other species. Humans and chimps just adapted better.

    Just like how HUMANS and DOGS have a common ancestor. Its a lot further back in time, but we came from the same rodent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Well great; let me know when they find remains of the common ancestor" (aka: Missing link) because to the best of my knowledge, they have not and have been looking for two centuries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    First of all, this official representative of NASA has said, he would love to go back to the moon.

    So the guy that NASA officials HAVE CHOSEN TO BE THE SPOKESMAN, and has a PhD in Chemical Engineering, and has been an Astro-naught for 21 years, is "senile"?!?

    And in an age in which we have self driving cars and more computing power in our cell-phones than the moon mission folks had in a room, we have "lost the tools to get us there" and cannot re-create them?!?!

    And these supposedly brilliant Nazi Scientists never wrote anything down? They never kept a record of what they were doing? They did all of those calculations IN THEIR HEADS?!?!?!

    And it is too complicated to get to the moon, because we do not have the technology (any more) but we are now working on a plan TO GO TO MARS?!?!

    I mean, think about what you wrote here for a second. Am I actually understanding your position or did I miss something?

    You are, in my estimation making these arguments from a position of pure scientific logic, correct?

    You are an idiot. Read the links in post 167. Other nations have been there.

    Nasa doesnt have the means anymore. They stopped using their big first stage booster rockets years ago. Thats why american astronauts use Russian rockets to get to space.

    Nasa can recreate them, but theres no point. There were too many accidents where people were incinerated and americas gov’t doesn’t want to spend money on space. Its all being funneled into banks/globalists/MIC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; “OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more “human” whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs”. Is that how it worked?"

    This is so funny.

    Yes organisms "have a choice" in whether they evolve or not by passing their genes to the next generation. But not a conscious "choice" (unless we're talking about humans today I'm the CRISPR/CAS9 age) like "I'm going to evolve into this because of this".

    Read some Richard Dawkins and then comment again if you're still finding it hard to grasp.

    But the question remains; “If apes evolved into humans, why are there still apes”?

    Obviously at some point you had two apes, one’s lineage went toward human, the other’s stayed Simian, my simple questions are, how? and why?

    Did one eat different bananas, drink different spring water? Did the albino apes not want to associate anymore with the black ones in the tribe, what?

    (BTW; “I don’t know” is a suitable response).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    It was a COMMON ANCESTOR to both humans and apes. That COMMON ANCESTOR became human, chimp and probably a few other species. Humans and chimps just adapted better.

    Just like how HUMANS and DOGS have a common ancestor. Its a lot further back in time, but we came from the same rodent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth


    Why would they die off? All they have to do is eat, sleep, and reproduce. You have a fundamental, and pathetic, misunderstanding of both “science” and evolution.
     
    So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; "OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more "human" whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs". Is that how it worked?

    “So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; “OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more “human” whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs”. Is that how it worked?”

    This is so funny.

    Yes organisms “have a choice” in whether they evolve or not by passing their genes to the next generation. But not a conscious “choice” (unless we’re talking about humans today I’m the CRISPR/CAS9 age) like “I’m going to evolve into this because of this”.

    Read some Richard Dawkins and then comment again if you’re still finding it hard to grasp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    But the question remains; "If apes evolved into humans, why are there still apes"?

    Obviously at some point you had two apes, one's lineage went toward human, the other's stayed Simian, my simple questions are, how? and why?

    Did one eat different bananas, drink different spring water? Did the albino apes not want to associate anymore with the black ones in the tribe, what?

    (BTW; "I don't know" is a suitable response).

    , @Delinquent Snail
    Crisper is kind of scary. We can easily get into a scenerio where genetically super humans dominate within a 2 generation gap and easily wipe out the "normies". Or we could fuck something up real bad and permently damage something that doesnt become apparent for a generation or 2, like making people less susceptible to cancer but it causes serious defects in the offspring. Who knows?

    It could be used for all kinds of amazing things. Make a genetic variant of current humans that are suited to deep space or remove diseases and physical deformities.

    Knowing humans tho, we wont use it for good. Look at nuclear power for a fine example. We have the ability to power our planet safely for generations, yet we would rather use it to decimate huge areas and poison other groups.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth


    Why would they die off? All they have to do is eat, sleep, and reproduce. You have a fundamental, and pathetic, misunderstanding of both “science” and evolution.
     
    So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; "OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more "human" whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs". Is that how it worked?

    So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not?

    You are nuts.

    Good-bye.

    Read More
    • Agree: Delinquent Snail
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    No, i dont believe him. Like i said, the dude looks senile. I believe we live in a different time and we no longer have the "want" to go there as a people.

    Also, our rockets and space program were only able to flourish because we stole nazi scientists. They got us to the moon. So yeah, i can believe we've lost some of the tools that allowed us to get there.

    Having been an athiest, then buddist, why downgrade to Christianity? Its as fake as any other religion since mankind first started making stories to control the masses.

    There are no gods or devils except for the ones we make.

    First of all, this official representative of NASA has said, he would love to go back to the moon.

    So the guy that NASA officials HAVE CHOSEN TO BE THE SPOKESMAN, and has a PhD in Chemical Engineering, and has been an Astro-naught for 21 years, is “senile”?!?

    And in an age in which we have self driving cars and more computing power in our cell-phones than the moon mission folks had in a room, we have “lost the tools to get us there” and cannot re-create them?!?!

    And these supposedly brilliant Nazi Scientists never wrote anything down? They never kept a record of what they were doing? They did all of those calculations IN THEIR HEADS?!?!?!

    And it is too complicated to get to the moon, because we do not have the technology (any more) but we are now working on a plan TO GO TO MARS?!?!

    I mean, think about what you wrote here for a second. Am I actually understanding your position or did I miss something?

    You are, in my estimation making these arguments from a position of pure scientific logic, correct?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    You are an idiot. Read the links in post 167. Other nations have been there.

    Nasa doesnt have the means anymore. They stopped using their big first stage booster rockets years ago. Thats why american astronauts use Russian rockets to get to space.

    Nasa can recreate them, but theres no point. There were too many accidents where people were incinerated and americas gov't doesn't want to spend money on space. Its all being funneled into banks/globalists/MIC.
    , @Delinquent Snail
    As a side comment, nasa recently pushed the revisionist history movie about a black lady that saved the day when the scientist and engineers that made the systems couldnt solve a few math problems.

    Their choice of representatives could clearly use some improvements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Why would they die off? All they have to do is eat, sleep, and reproduce. You have a fundamental, and pathetic, misunderstanding of both “science” and evolution.

    So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; “OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more “human” whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs”. Is that how it worked?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not?
     
    You are nuts.

    Good-bye.
    , @RaceRealist88
    "So let me see if I understand this; apes had a choice as to whether they evolved or not? It was kind of like; “OK Bobby, me, Mike and Jane are going to have descendants that are a little more “human” whatever that is, and you Dave and Regina are going to keep your non-opposed thumbs”. Is that how it worked?"

    This is so funny.

    Yes organisms "have a choice" in whether they evolve or not by passing their genes to the next generation. But not a conscious "choice" (unless we're talking about humans today I'm the CRISPR/CAS9 age) like "I'm going to evolve into this because of this".

    Read some Richard Dawkins and then comment again if you're still finding it hard to grasp.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    So you believe Don Petit, the longest running Astro-naught in the history of NASA's explanation that we cannot return to the moon because "we lost 1967 technology and cannot re-create it"?

    I did not make this up, I linked him saying it earlier. You actually believe this?

    All space programs around the world, are an excuse to funnel tax monies into black-ops programs. Nothing more nothing less.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit

    I was an atheist for the first 25 years of my life, a zen Buddhist for the next 25, and believe me Sir, If I so desired, I could make your argument better than you, on stage behind a podium without notes. Just believe me on this, It came to my understanding that everything in our common life; evolution, outer space, etc. is simply a blaspheme of God and the bible, so I converted to Christianity.


    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+104%3A5-19&version=NIV

    No, i dont believe him. Like i said, the dude looks senile. I believe we live in a different time and we no longer have the “want” to go there as a people.

    Also, our rockets and space program were only able to flourish because we stole nazi scientists. They got us to the moon. So yeah, i can believe we’ve lost some of the tools that allowed us to get there.

    Having been an athiest, then buddist, why downgrade to Christianity? Its as fake as any other religion since mankind first started making stories to control the masses.

    There are no gods or devils except for the ones we make.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    First of all, this official representative of NASA has said, he would love to go back to the moon.

    So the guy that NASA officials HAVE CHOSEN TO BE THE SPOKESMAN, and has a PhD in Chemical Engineering, and has been an Astro-naught for 21 years, is "senile"?!?

    And in an age in which we have self driving cars and more computing power in our cell-phones than the moon mission folks had in a room, we have "lost the tools to get us there" and cannot re-create them?!?!

    And these supposedly brilliant Nazi Scientists never wrote anything down? They never kept a record of what they were doing? They did all of those calculations IN THEIR HEADS?!?!?!

    And it is too complicated to get to the moon, because we do not have the technology (any more) but we are now working on a plan TO GO TO MARS?!?!

    I mean, think about what you wrote here for a second. Am I actually understanding your position or did I miss something?

    You are, in my estimation making these arguments from a position of pure scientific logic, correct?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anarchyst
    Anyone who states that any branch of science is "settled" is a fool. Just look at the field day "climate change" skeptics are having with the "believers", exposing their false "settled" science a a fraud upon humanity.
    The same situation exists with hardcore "evolutionists" who cannot prove with one shred of evidence that evolution takes place.
    If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.
    Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.
    At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.
    While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’ In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
    The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.
    Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed ‘large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.’ They found a number of regions that ‘might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.’

    Anyone who states that any branch of science is “settled” is a fool.

    Science? Like phrenology?

    Evolution is a fact, proven repeatedly, demonstrated with so much confirming data that most has not even been catalogued and cross-referenced. True well beyond the most trifling doubt.

    Now, what’s NOT settled is the wild-ass bullshit that creationists and other snake-handling mystics will trot out. But they do. Every day, in every way.

    If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.

    Why would they die off? All they have to do is eat, sleep, and reproduce. You have a fundamental, and pathetic, misunderstanding of both “science” and evolution.

    All of which just wastes my time. You are an ignorant and quite pathetic ranter and raver for Jesus. Go away. Go tell some Negroes they should have died off when white people appeared. Mother of God, but people like you are stupid.

    Read More
    • Troll: anarchyst
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    You're not getting it, Sport, I'll try again:

    Evolution is a theory.

    Water flowing downhill is a scientific fact.

    I'm not sure how else I can explain this.

    You’re not getting it, Sport, I’ll try again:

    Evolution is a theory.

    LOL. You’re not getting it, Beavis. Evolution is a fact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    What else do you believe about the moon and earth? I love how flat Earth, moon-landing denial and Creationism seem to go hand in hand a lot. It makes it easier to identify the anti-science people.

    And I meant to hit the "LOL" button.

    First question:

    Do you believe that we cannot re-create 1967 technology?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    So you believe Don Petit, the longest running Astro-naught in the history of NASA's explanation that we cannot return to the moon because "we lost 1967 technology and cannot re-create it"?

    I did not make this up, I linked him saying it earlier. You actually believe this?

    All space programs around the world, are an excuse to funnel tax monies into black-ops programs. Nothing more nothing less.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit

    I was an atheist for the first 25 years of my life, a zen Buddhist for the next 25, and believe me Sir, If I so desired, I could make your argument better than you, on stage behind a podium without notes. Just believe me on this, It came to my understanding that everything in our common life; evolution, outer space, etc. is simply a blaspheme of God and the bible, so I converted to Christianity.


    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+104%3A5-19&version=NIV

    What else do you believe about the moon and earth? I love how flat Earth, moon-landing denial and Creationism seem to go hand in hand a lot. It makes it easier to identify the anti-science people.

    And I meant to hit the “LOL” button.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    First question:

    Do you believe that we cannot re-create 1967 technology?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-1

    India's lunar mission.


    http://www.businessinsider.com/new-photos-of-the-china-moon-landing-mission-2016-2

    China's lunar mission.

    We (americans) went there 6 times. We left little mirrors on several missions. Universitys all over the world can point a laser at these little mirrors and measure the distance to the moon. If you had a powerful enough laser and a precise enough rig for it, you could do it yourself.


    That video is.... Well idk. I dont know who he is, and his eyes look a bit off, like he was recently concussed.

    You keep linking videos of crazy people. The person that made that video had several spelling errors and grammer errors, and not basic ones that are common and excusable. Seems like you keep getting (((wrong))) info from people that are both uneducated, and dumb. Those are not mutually exclusive, fyi. Dont want to have to post again correcting you.

    So you believe Don Petit, the longest running Astro-naught in the history of NASA’s explanation that we cannot return to the moon because “we lost 1967 technology and cannot re-create it”?

    I did not make this up, I linked him saying it earlier. You actually believe this?

    All space programs around the world, are an excuse to funnel tax monies into black-ops programs. Nothing more nothing less.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit

    I was an atheist for the first 25 years of my life, a zen Buddhist for the next 25, and believe me Sir, If I so desired, I could make your argument better than you, on stage behind a podium without notes. Just believe me on this, It came to my understanding that everything in our common life; evolution, outer space, etc. is simply a blaspheme of God and the bible, so I converted to Christianity.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+104%3A5-19&version=NIV

    Read More
    • LOL: Delinquent Snail
    • Troll: RaceRealist88
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    What else do you believe about the moon and earth? I love how flat Earth, moon-landing denial and Creationism seem to go hand in hand a lot. It makes it easier to identify the anti-science people.

    And I meant to hit the "LOL" button.
    , @Delinquent Snail
    No, i dont believe him. Like i said, the dude looks senile. I believe we live in a different time and we no longer have the "want" to go there as a people.

    Also, our rockets and space program were only able to flourish because we stole nazi scientists. They got us to the moon. So yeah, i can believe we've lost some of the tools that allowed us to get there.

    Having been an athiest, then buddist, why downgrade to Christianity? Its as fake as any other religion since mankind first started making stories to control the masses.

    There are no gods or devils except for the ones we make.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?

    You might agree with me that the Mediterraneans have been practising with alcohol, and breeding out the village drunk, for perhaps 10,000 years, the northern Europeans for maybe 4000 and the unfortunate indigenes of Australia and the Americas for hardly any time at all.

    “Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?”

    I have though that also. They still seem to have a (to have preserved much of a) Mediterranean wine culture (such as that has traditionally existed/exists in the Mediterranean parts of Europe—esp the East Mediterranean—including the pre-Islamic Middle East. They drink small amounts (of wine usually) with meals, not do not typically traditionally “binge”—so t0 speak—or drink large amounts recreationally, or at once, as Northern Europeans sometimes seem to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    I enjoyed your discussion to date. Fascinating.
    A few years ago I tried to interest myself in this area, but events overtook me. My rather raw interest at the time was piqued by this man's writings: http://www.michaelbradley.info

    Are either of you familiar with him? Is he worth the candle, or has his thesis been gainsaid?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    "I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don’t think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin..."

    Perhaps not a strong or close claim, But perhaps, interestingly, a more distant one, since the Italic peoples—that the Jews mixed with (like the Romans Latins and their Italic-speaking cousins in Italy; the Faliscans, Oscans, Samnites, Adriatic Veneti) may be (though it is disputed) closer to Celts (and vice versa) in language affinity/origin (in the Indo-European ethnolinguistic tree) than either are to other Indo-European groups (Celtic and Italic are may be "sister branches" in the IE language family—though not as close for instance as Baltic/Slavic or Indic/Iranian).

    One reconstructed phylogeny (others differ slightly and not all include Italo-Celtic):
    https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3850/is-there-a-named-common-ancestor-of-germanic-and-latin-besides-indo-european

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic

    Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?

    You might agree with me that the Mediterraneans have been practising with alcohol, and breeding out the village drunk, for perhaps 10,000 years, the northern Europeans for maybe 4000 and the unfortunate indigenes of Australia and the Americas for hardly any time at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    "Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?"

    I have though that also. They still seem to have a (to have preserved much of a) Mediterranean wine culture (such as that has traditionally existed/exists in the Mediterranean parts of Europe—esp the East Mediterranean—including the pre-Islamic Middle East. They drink small amounts (of wine usually) with meals, not do not typically traditionally "binge"—so t0 speak—or drink large amounts recreationally, or at once, as Northern Europeans sometimes seem to do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "that the Hobbit’s size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment"

    Correct. This is proof that evolution isn't "progressive" and that energy availability dictates body and brain size and if not enough available, reductions in both will occur.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/04/22/the-evolutionary-puzzle-of-floresiensis/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-for-more-evolved-and-progressive-evolution-1/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    The same holds for Pygmies.

    Several human “pygmy” populations (people whose height does not exceed 150 centimeters, or 4.9 feet) have evolved in energy limited places like rain forests or islands. Perhaps the small size of the Dmanisi hominins from Georgia also reflected selection to save energy among the first colonists of Eurasia. (Lieberman, 2013: 391)

    It would be interesting to know of cases where competing selective forces pulled/pushed in exactly opposie directions. For example in size. The large male obviously had a better chance of defending his family or clan and also perhaps of impregnating women. Large strong females? Apart from the large all round who benefitted from insulation of the core against cold….

    Perhaps small size wasn’t just ctonducive to conservation of the food supply. Maybe being smaller was more efficient in some way if you didn’t need to be able to wield the hesviest of spears. If you only needed to be good at finding some place to hide and a poison tipped darts were your weapon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    Again many thanks. I was completely unsware of the multiple separate evolutions of pygmy people though aware of the theory that the Hobbit's size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment. How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?

    I particular enjoy your support for the idea that the pygmy negritos or their maybe taller forebears belonged to the first wave of Australisns. I find all the pious words about First Australians to be ignorant humbug given our necessary ignorance of much of the history of Aborigines in the 60,000 or so years to 1788.

    “that the Hobbit’s size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment”

    Correct. This is proof that evolution isn’t “progressive” and that energy availability dictates body and brain size and if not enough available, reductions in both will occur.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/04/22/the-evolutionary-puzzle-of-floresiensis/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-for-more-evolved-and-progressive-evolution-1/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    The same holds for Pygmies.

    Several human “pygmy” populations (people whose height does not exceed 150 centimeters, or 4.9 feet) have evolved in energy limited places like rain forests or islands. Perhaps the small size of the Dmanisi hominins from Georgia also reflected selection to save energy among the first colonists of Eurasia. (Lieberman, 2013: 391)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    It would be interesting to know of cases where competing selective forces pulled/pushed in exactly opposie directions. For example in size. The large male obviously had a better chance of defending his family or clan and also perhaps of impregnating women. Large strong females? Apart from the large all round who benefitted from insulation of the core against cold....

    Perhaps small size wasn't just ctonducive to conservation of the food supply. Maybe being smaller was more efficient in some way if you didn't need to be able to wield the hesviest of spears. If you only needed to be good at finding some place to hide and a poison tipped darts were your weapon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    Again many thanks. I was completely unsware of the multiple separate evolutions of pygmy people though aware of the theory that the Hobbit's size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment. How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?

    I particular enjoy your support for the idea that the pygmy negritos or their maybe taller forebears belonged to the first wave of Australisns. I find all the pious words about First Australians to be ignorant humbug given our necessary ignorance of much of the history of Aborigines in the 60,000 or so years to 1788.

    “How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?”

    They most likely did. All native unmixed subsaharan groups (hover distantly related/unrelated: West and Central Africans, Nilotes, Pygmies, Hadzas, Khoisans, etc) have kinky/kinkier hair textures, as do some tropical Eurasians (who’s ancestors have always lives in low latitudes): such as (Negritos, Andamanese, Tasmanian Aborigines, Papua New Guineans, and many-most Melanesians).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    Fascinating. Thank you for all that. I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don't think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin (i don't thonk he has any red hair!)

    I trust Wally and some of the other Koestler fans will read and absorb that.

    A related matter that intereats me is bottle necks and the growth of large endogamous populations from.very small ones. It is not only Ashlenazi Jews whom I would count on being able to recognise in their six or so commoneat physiognomies, but Koreans for another example whom I guess descend from say 50,000 people of 1500 years ago.

    “I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don’t think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin…”

    Perhaps not a strong or close claim, But perhaps, interestingly, a more distant one, since the Italic peoples—that the Jews mixed with (like the Romans Latins and their Italic-speaking cousins in Italy; the Faliscans, Oscans, Samnites, Adriatic Veneti) may be (though it is disputed) closer to Celts (and vice versa) in language affinity/origin (in the Indo-European ethnolinguistic tree) than either are to other Indo-European groups (Celtic and Italic are may be “sister branches” in the IE language family—though not as close for instance as Baltic/Slavic or Indic/Iranian).

    One reconstructed phylogeny (others differ slightly and not all include Italo-Celtic):

    https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3850/is-there-a-named-common-ancestor-of-germanic-and-latin-besides-indo-european

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Is it not a striking feature of Ashkenazim that their Mediterranean heritage shows up as the cause of their resistance to alcoholism and just plain drunkenness?

    You might agree with me that the Mediterraneans have been practising with alcohol, and breeding out the village drunk, for perhaps 10,000 years, the northern Europeans for maybe 4000 and the unfortunate indigenes of Australia and the Americas for hardly any time at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Delinquent Snail
    Miyazaki does like to have little girls as the central characters. Could be a lolita thing, or could be to further emphasise the contrast of innocence and the harshness of reality. Grave of the fireflies, i think, showcases it best.

    Im not sure if i have a favorite one. Mononoke was good, and my kids love spirited away and totorro (that cat bus makes them light up with joy). I loved the style and the detail in howl's moving castle(i think that was the name).

    I was reading that theres another studio thats following in ghibli's art style, know anything about it?

    No. It is likely just a strange rumour because the son taking over.

    How could there be a point to it?

    For an adult, I would recommending some from Studio 4°C, and many by Mamoru Oshii, Ghost in the Shell the most famous, but many more are great.

    For a child, I would recommend Soviet animations of classic European fairy tales, also old Astro-boy, anything by Osamu Tezuka, incidentally, Miyazaki of Ghibli, said that his ambition was to surpass that cel-based style, but now that it is reliant on CG, that it is not meaning much now.

    Also, art animations from here, also from Warsaw Pact places, from Russia, Estonian, Czech makers excelled in USSR times. The Estonian studio still does, but not for children. The pre-semi-indepemce ones (the place moved from USSR to EUSSR, so not independent), many very beautiful.

    Also to recommending, Nagai Go’s Cutie Honey, turned into live action and effects by Hideaki Anno, alright for children, I think, but perhaps not for pubescent and adolescent men, the star as Cutie Honey, Eriko Sato, too stunnimg

    Sorry that I do not have concrete links to posting now, too tired.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    "I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people."

    There is no evidence that they do. Nilotic groups (with the exception of a few with minor Cushitic admixture like the Massai and similar tribes who have some Cushitic ancestry as mentioned in the link) generally have little to no Eurasian ancestry (the purer Nilotes/Nilo-Saharans are concentrated around South and Central Sudan—see Tishkoff, the indigenous East African "East Africa cluster", element predominates in them—and to lesser extent a few parts of Kenya/North Uganda). Pygmies and Khoisan do not really how evidence of such admixture (or Eurasian origins) either—they seem to have come mostly from very early diverging groups/branches of African homo sapiens that branched off within Africa even before the ancestors of most other subsaharan Africans did. One exception is minor admixture in several (especially pastoralist) Khoisan groups (introduced relatively recently, within the last few thousand years) coming from East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry) who brought pastoralism to the ancestors of some Khoisans like the Khoi Khoi.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilotic_peoples#Genetics

    http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-east-african-cluster.html

    Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So…. sources and links please.

    "Pygmies" from outside Africa (the various Negrito groups and the Andamanese) are not related to African Pygmies. their short stature evolved independently as they settled in various similar tropical forest environments (convergent evolution). There are several studies on them.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/07/asian-negritos-are-not-one-population/#.WYMYw3eZOqk

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito#Genetics

    Australia was likely settled by a few (at least two main) waves of people migrating along the coast of South Asia (whose out-of-Africa ancestors had remained in southern lands and retained their dark skin and other tropical traits), that later mixed in various proportions. The first may have been Negrito-like (related to the Negritos of South East Asia), with later waves more similar, and perhaps then more related to, the taller and less kinky-haired "proto Australoid" types of South India. Proto-Negrito derived tendencies (and cultures) my have survived in some parts of Australia more than others, and of course in Tasmania (where the natives had Negrito traits—probably descending mostly-entirely from the aforementioned first wave).

    Again many thanks. I was completely unsware of the multiple separate evolutions of pygmy people though aware of the theory that the Hobbit’s size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment. How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?

    I particular enjoy your support for the idea that the pygmy negritos or their maybe taller forebears belonged to the first wave of Australisns. I find all the pious words about First Australians to be ignorant humbug given our necessary ignorance of much of the history of Aborigines in the 60,000 or so years to 1788.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    "How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?"

    They most likely did. All native unmixed subsaharan groups (hover distantly related/unrelated: West and Central Africans, Nilotes, Pygmies, Hadzas, Khoisans, etc) have kinky/kinkier hair textures, as do some tropical Eurasians (who's ancestors have always lives in low latitudes): such as (Negritos, Andamanese, Tasmanian Aborigines, Papua New Guineans, and many-most Melanesians).
    , @RaceRealist88
    "that the Hobbit’s size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment"

    Correct. This is proof that evolution isn't "progressive" and that energy availability dictates body and brain size and if not enough available, reductions in both will occur.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/04/22/the-evolutionary-puzzle-of-floresiensis/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/10/25/the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-for-more-evolved-and-progressive-evolution-1/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/01/marching-up-the-evolutionary-tree/

    The same holds for Pygmies.

    Several human “pygmy” populations (people whose height does not exceed 150 centimeters, or 4.9 feet) have evolved in energy limited places like rain forests or islands. Perhaps the small size of the Dmanisi hominins from Georgia also reflected selection to save energy among the first colonists of Eurasia. (Lieberman, 2013: 391)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    Edit:
    "(though northerners also tend generally to be brunet rather than blond or particularly North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners..."

    Fascinating. Thank you for all that. I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don’t think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin (i don’t thonk he has any red hair!)

    I trust Wally and some of the other Koestler fans will read and absorb that.

    A related matter that intereats me is bottle necks and the growth of large endogamous populations from.very small ones. It is not only Ashlenazi Jews whom I would count on being able to recognise in their six or so commoneat physiognomies, but Koreans for another example whom I guess descend from say 50,000 people of 1500 years ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    "I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don’t think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin..."

    Perhaps not a strong or close claim, But perhaps, interestingly, a more distant one, since the Italic peoples—that the Jews mixed with (like the Romans Latins and their Italic-speaking cousins in Italy; the Faliscans, Oscans, Samnites, Adriatic Veneti) may be (though it is disputed) closer to Celts (and vice versa) in language affinity/origin (in the Indo-European ethnolinguistic tree) than either are to other Indo-European groups (Celtic and Italic are may be "sister branches" in the IE language family—though not as close for instance as Baltic/Slavic or Indic/Iranian).

    One reconstructed phylogeny (others differ slightly and not all include Italo-Celtic):
    https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3850/is-there-a-named-common-ancestor-of-germanic-and-latin-besides-indo-european

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anarchyst
    Anyone who states that any branch of science is "settled" is a fool. Just look at the field day "climate change" skeptics are having with the "believers", exposing their false "settled" science a a fraud upon humanity.
    The same situation exists with hardcore "evolutionists" who cannot prove with one shred of evidence that evolution takes place.
    If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.
    Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.
    At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.
    While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’ In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
    The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.
    Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed ‘large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.’ They found a number of regions that ‘might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.’

    “The same situation exists with hardcore “evolutionists” who cannot prove with one shred of evidence that evolution takes place.”

    Species change this is not up for debate.

    “If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.”

    Already answered.

    And I already explained the chromosomal fusion.

    Anything Creationists have thought up has been summarily rebutted. It

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous

    Why is “theory” in quotes?
     
    Because evolution is fact, not theory. Wackadoodle creationists stridently insist it is but theory, somehow always invalid, always unfounded, always a product of godlessness -- meh, all the usual stupidass chickenshit that Believers trot out.

    Evolution is proven beyond all doubt. It is no longer a "theory"; it is a concrete edifice of verified fact.

    It is 2017. Anyone who insists that evolution is unproven is, typically, some variety of religious fanatic nutcake. He or she deserves nothing but dismissive contempt.

    Anyone who states that any branch of science is “settled” is a fool. Just look at the field day “climate change” skeptics are having with the “believers”, exposing their false “settled” science a a fraud upon humanity.
    The same situation exists with hardcore “evolutionists” who cannot prove with one shred of evidence that evolution takes place.
    If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.
    Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.
    At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.
    While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’ In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
    The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.
    Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed ‘large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.’ They found a number of regions that ‘might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.’

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "The same situation exists with hardcore “evolutionists” who cannot prove with one shred of evidence that evolution takes place."

    Species change this is not up for debate.

    "If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct."

    Already answered.

    And I already explained the chromosomal fusion.

    Anything Creationists have thought up has been summarily rebutted. It
    , @Anonymous

    Anyone who states that any branch of science is “settled” is a fool.
     
    Science? Like phrenology?

    Evolution is a fact, proven repeatedly, demonstrated with so much confirming data that most has not even been catalogued and cross-referenced. True well beyond the most trifling doubt.

    Now, what's NOT settled is the wild-ass bullshit that creationists and other snake-handling mystics will trot out. But they do. Every day, in every way.

    If humans ascended from apes, why do apes still exist? It would seem that the superior species would have prospered while the lesser species would have become extinct.
     
    Why would they die off? All they have to do is eat, sleep, and reproduce. You have a fundamental, and pathetic, misunderstanding of both "science" and evolution.

    All of which just wastes my time. You are an ignorant and quite pathetic ranter and raver for Jesus. Go away. Go tell some Negroes they should have died off when white people appeared. Mother of God, but people like you are stupid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    "I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people."

    There is no evidence that they do. Nilotic groups (with the exception of a few with minor Cushitic admixture like the Massai and similar tribes who have some Cushitic ancestry as mentioned in the link) generally have little to no Eurasian ancestry (the purer Nilotes/Nilo-Saharans are concentrated around South and Central Sudan—see Tishkoff, the indigenous East African "East Africa cluster", element predominates in them—and to lesser extent a few parts of Kenya/North Uganda). Pygmies and Khoisan do not really how evidence of such admixture (or Eurasian origins) either—they seem to have come mostly from very early diverging groups/branches of African homo sapiens that branched off within Africa even before the ancestors of most other subsaharan Africans did. One exception is minor admixture in several (especially pastoralist) Khoisan groups (introduced relatively recently, within the last few thousand years) coming from East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry) who brought pastoralism to the ancestors of some Khoisans like the Khoi Khoi.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilotic_peoples#Genetics

    http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-east-african-cluster.html

    Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So…. sources and links please.

    "Pygmies" from outside Africa (the various Negrito groups and the Andamanese) are not related to African Pygmies. their short stature evolved independently as they settled in various similar tropical forest environments (convergent evolution). There are several studies on them.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/07/asian-negritos-are-not-one-population/#.WYMYw3eZOqk

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito#Genetics

    Australia was likely settled by a few (at least two main) waves of people migrating along the coast of South Asia (whose out-of-Africa ancestors had remained in southern lands and retained their dark skin and other tropical traits), that later mixed in various proportions. The first may have been Negrito-like (related to the Negritos of South East Asia), with later waves more similar, and perhaps then more related to, the taller and less kinky-haired "proto Australoid" types of South India. Proto-Negrito derived tendencies (and cultures) my have survived in some parts of Australia more than others, and of course in Tasmania (where the natives had Negrito traits—probably descending mostly-entirely from the aforementioned first wave).

    Edit:
    “…East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry)”
    Should be: “a minority of Eurasian ancestry”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people. Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So.... sources and links please.

    “I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people.”

    There is no evidence that they do. Nilotic groups (with the exception of a few with minor Cushitic admixture like the Massai and similar tribes who have some Cushitic ancestry as mentioned in the link) generally have little to no Eurasian ancestry (the purer Nilotes/Nilo-Saharans are concentrated around South and Central Sudan—see Tishkoff, the indigenous East African “East Africa cluster”, element predominates in them—and to lesser extent a few parts of Kenya/North Uganda). Pygmies and Khoisan do not really how evidence of such admixture (or Eurasian origins) either—they seem to have come mostly from very early diverging groups/branches of African homo sapiens that branched off within Africa even before the ancestors of most other subsaharan Africans did. One exception is minor admixture in several (especially pastoralist) Khoisan groups (introduced relatively recently, within the last few thousand years) coming from East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry) who brought pastoralism to the ancestors of some Khoisans like the Khoi Khoi.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilotic_peoples#Genetics

    http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-east-african-cluster.html

    Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So…. sources and links please.

    “Pygmies” from outside Africa (the various Negrito groups and the Andamanese) are not related to African Pygmies. their short stature evolved independently as they settled in various similar tropical forest environments (convergent evolution). There are several studies on them.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/07/asian-negritos-are-not-one-population/#.WYMYw3eZOqk

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito#Genetics

    Australia was likely settled by a few (at least two main) waves of people migrating along the coast of South Asia (whose out-of-Africa ancestors had remained in southern lands and retained their dark skin and other tropical traits), that later mixed in various proportions. The first may have been Negrito-like (related to the Negritos of South East Asia), with later waves more similar, and perhaps then more related to, the taller and less kinky-haired “proto Australoid” types of South India. Proto-Negrito derived tendencies (and cultures) my have survived in some parts of Australia more than others, and of course in Tasmania (where the natives had Negrito traits—probably descending mostly-entirely from the aforementioned first wave).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    Edit:
    "...East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry)"
    Should be: "a minority of Eurasian ancestry"
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Again many thanks. I was completely unsware of the multiple separate evolutions of pygmy people though aware of the theory that the Hobbit's size is thought to be an adaptation to a limiting and limited environment. How come the pygmy negrito hair? Is it just that all out of Africa people started with that hair?

    I particular enjoy your support for the idea that the pygmy negritos or their maybe taller forebears belonged to the first wave of Australisns. I find all the pious words about First Australians to be ignorant humbug given our necessary ignorance of much of the history of Aborigines in the 60,000 or so years to 1788.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As a rule of thumb, Jewish people are part Jewish and part whatever country(ies) their folks came from. Ashkenazi Europeans descend from Jewish men who married Italian women, moved north as a group and adopted East European food habits.

    But this thread is about Out of Africa versus Out of Asia hypotheses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    "My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair;"

    By my observation (which is also extensive) Ashkenazim tend to be dark haired and light haired ones are a minority. They also(in coloring and features) tend to resemble the lighter skinned Middle Eastern types from the Levant/Eastern Med. area.; Lebanon, Syria, parts of Turkey Palestine, Armenia, to a lesser extent Greeks and S. Italians (all these peoples also have among themselves a non-trivial minority of lighter haired and light eyed types.)

    Brown head hair and read facial hair is not exclusive to Celts but can occur in other Europeans (and even a minority of pale Northern West Asians/North Middle Easterners)


    There is not a very significant amount if Germanic ancestry in Northern Italy. Genetic studies show that admixture after the early Roman era has mostly been minor (there is some pre-early Roman era Celtic admixture in parts of North Italy however, and the south has some Greek admixture).

    The more Northern Italians have always been a little lighter on average than those further south (though northerners also are mostly brunet rather than North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners or as dark on average as many southerners.

    "His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans."
    "...namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy..."

    The Ashkenazim mostly descend from Jews that arrived in Germany (mostly—but perhaps not exclusively from Italy and perhaps to some extent from southern France/South Gaul) late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (800s-1100s AD approximately)—as shown by, not only genetic, but also the cultural, historical, and linguistic evidence. The Jews that lived in southern Germany prior to that, likely mostly died out and/or were only a tiny element later absorbed (by non-Jews and/or by the later waves f Jews), and this would not have contributed very significantly to the Ashkenazim. The Jewish communities Ashkenazim descend from were likely around Central Italy (Rome, Tuscany), and to a lesser extent North and South Italy—though some fraction might have also been from southern Gaul (which was inhabited by the descendants of Romanized Celts). There is no evidence that they lived in Germany before South Europe, but rather they derived from Roman (often late antique) era Jewish migrants from the Near East who settled in Italy (and in some cases sometimes in Greece/Greek lands) and intermixed to a degree with southern European women.


    "So… I accept the importance of “Roman” or “Italian”
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool."

    The genetic studies show a predominance of southern European (especially Italian) in the European portion of Ashkenazic jewish ancestry (The Ashkenazim are most closely related genetically to the Italkic Jews—Ashkenazim come from a branch of medieval proto-Italkim that went into the Rhineland, descendants of the ancient and early medieval jewish community of Italy. Their second closest relatives are the Sephardim, whose ancestors are also a mix of Levantine and south European because they left the Levant and migrated West across Roman N. Africa—likely living in heavilyGreek Alexandria and mixing somewhat with Greeks—until they got to Spain.

    "The time and place of European admixture in Ashkenazi Jewish history"

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644

    "AJ appeared in Europe in the 10th century, and their ancestry is thought to comprise European (EU) and Middle-Eastern (ME) components"..."The major source of EU ancestry in AJ was found to be Southern Europe (≈60–80% of EU ancestry),"

    Ashkenazic ancestry is about half Levantine, and close to half southern European (60-80% of the European ancestry is southern), with the rest being other European.

    "I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help."

    Cochran talks about it below (Ashkenazic European admixture is mostly-largely Italian (there could be some Celtic element—likely at least a little—but it is small, and the Germanic element generally smaller). He (Cochran) is likely incorrect however, about the very common Ashkenazic K mtdna haplotype (maternal lineage) not being Middle Eastern, as its Middle Eastern origin has been supported, not only by Behar, but by the recent Fernandez study (though many other Ashhenazic mtdna/maternal lineages—perhaps slightly over about half of them, with the paternal lineages being mostly Levantine/Mid Eastern—are in fact South European).

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/jewish-moms/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews#Female_lineages:_Mitochondrial_DNA

    "A 2014 study by Fernández et al. has found that Ashkenazi Jews display a frequency of haplogroup K in their maternal DNA that suggests an ancient Near Eastern origin, similar to the results of Behar. He stated that this observation clearly contradicts the results of the study led by Richards that suggested a European source for 3 exclusively Ashkenazi K lineages."

    Edit:
    “(though northerners also tend generally to be brunet rather than blond or particularly North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners…”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Fascinating. Thank you for all that. I shall have to send it on to my Rabbi friend (and tell him I don't think I any longer have a strong claim to call him cousin (i don't thonk he has any red hair!)

    I trust Wally and some of the other Koestler fans will read and absorb that.

    A related matter that intereats me is bottle necks and the growth of large endogamous populations from.very small ones. It is not only Ashlenazi Jews whom I would count on being able to recognise in their six or so commoneat physiognomies, but Koreans for another example whom I guess descend from say 50,000 people of 1500 years ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help.

    My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair; then mentioning to a Rabbi/ historian that the Koestler story I had resd years before was hard to square with Yiddish being Germanic. His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans.

    My inference was that enterprising Celtic women had made sure successful but lonely young Jewish merchants didn't have to wait for a bride shipment from their homeland. (Cp. India for the East India Company's first 200 years).

    Then I noted Cochran's emphasis on (northern I think) Italy and I could still see the Celtic connection because I recalled that Cisalpine Gaul was in fact most of northern Italy and that Gauls had sacked Rome in 390BC (remember the geese which saved the Capitol?).

    Before the end of the Western Roman Empire Goths had been recruited in large numbers yo the army and so many settled in Italy that those Germanic people had no trouble finishing off the Empire in the 5th century AD.

    So... I accept the importance of "Roman" or "Italian"
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool.

    I shsll welcome further info to put me right. And i thank aanyway you for prompting a new thought, namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy just ss the owners of beautiful Roman villas and the commanders of Romsn legions did from Britain.

    “My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair;”

    By my observation (which is also extensive) Ashkenazim tend to be dark haired and light haired ones are a minority. They also(in coloring and features) tend to resemble the lighter skinned Middle Eastern types from the Levant/Eastern Med. area.; Lebanon, Syria, parts of Turkey Palestine, Armenia, to a lesser extent Greeks and S. Italians (all these peoples also have among themselves a non-trivial minority of lighter haired and light eyed types.)

    Brown head hair and read facial hair is not exclusive to Celts but can occur in other Europeans (and even a minority of pale Northern West Asians/North Middle Easterners)

    There is not a very significant amount if Germanic ancestry in Northern Italy. Genetic studies show that admixture after the early Roman era has mostly been minor (there is some pre-early Roman era Celtic admixture in parts of North Italy however, and the south has some Greek admixture).

    The more Northern Italians have always been a little lighter on average than those further south (though northerners also are mostly brunet rather than North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners or as dark on average as many southerners.

    “His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans.”
    “…namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy…”

    The Ashkenazim mostly descend from Jews that arrived in Germany (mostly—but perhaps not exclusively from Italy and perhaps to some extent from southern France/South Gaul) late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (800s-1100s AD approximately)—as shown by, not only genetic, but also the cultural, historical, and linguistic evidence. The Jews that lived in southern Germany prior to that, likely mostly died out and/or were only a tiny element later absorbed (by non-Jews and/or by the later waves f Jews), and this would not have contributed very significantly to the Ashkenazim. The Jewish communities Ashkenazim descend from were likely around Central Italy (Rome, Tuscany), and to a lesser extent North and South Italy—though some fraction might have also been from southern Gaul (which was inhabited by the descendants of Romanized Celts). There is no evidence that they lived in Germany before South Europe, but rather they derived from Roman (often late antique) era Jewish migrants from the Near East who settled in Italy (and in some cases sometimes in Greece/Greek lands) and intermixed to a degree with southern European women.

    “So… I accept the importance of “Roman” or “Italian”
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool.”

    The genetic studies show a predominance of southern European (especially Italian) in the European portion of Ashkenazic jewish ancestry (The Ashkenazim are most closely related genetically to the Italkic Jews—Ashkenazim come from a branch of medieval proto-Italkim that went into the Rhineland, descendants of the ancient and early medieval jewish community of Italy. Their second closest relatives are the Sephardim, whose ancestors are also a mix of Levantine and south European because they left the Levant and migrated West across Roman N. Africa—likely living in heavilyGreek Alexandria and mixing somewhat with Greeks—until they got to Spain.

    “The time and place of European admixture in Ashkenazi Jewish history”

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644

    “AJ appeared in Europe in the 10th century, and their ancestry is thought to comprise European (EU) and Middle-Eastern (ME) components”…”The major source of EU ancestry in AJ was found to be Southern Europe (≈60–80% of EU ancestry),”

    Ashkenazic ancestry is about half Levantine, and close to half southern European (60-80% of the European ancestry is southern), with the rest being other European.

    “I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help.”

    Cochran talks about it below (Ashkenazic European admixture is mostly-largely Italian (there could be some Celtic element—likely at least a little—but it is small, and the Germanic element generally smaller). He (Cochran) is likely incorrect however, about the very common Ashkenazic K mtdna haplotype (maternal lineage) not being Middle Eastern, as its Middle Eastern origin has been supported, not only by Behar, but by the recent Fernandez study (though many other Ashhenazic mtdna/maternal lineages—perhaps slightly over about half of them, with the paternal lineages being mostly Levantine/Mid Eastern—are in fact South European).

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/jewish-moms/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews#Female_lineages:_Mitochondrial_DNA

    “A 2014 study by Fernández et al. has found that Ashkenazi Jews display a frequency of haplogroup K in their maternal DNA that suggests an ancient Near Eastern origin, similar to the results of Behar. He stated that this observation clearly contradicts the results of the study led by Richards that suggested a European source for 3 exclusively Ashkenazi K lineages.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    Edit:
    "(though northerners also tend generally to be brunet rather than blond or particularly North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners..."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    You're not getting it, Sport, I'll try again:

    Evolution is a theory.

    Water flowing downhill is a scientific fact.

    I'm not sure how else I can explain this.

    “Evolution is a theory”

    …. Reread my comment. You creationists don’t know what the word “theory” means.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @insignificant
    corrections

    [on my own I studied Gerald Massey and found his body of work compelling. since then the black scholars have done yeoman work ..they are treasures e and well meant biology since]

    1. the black scholars are treasures: Chiekeh Anta Diop perhaps the best of them all, Theophille Obenga and many more.

    2. the Rebecca Cann and all the well meant scholarly biology she inspired

    3. the latin skulls have been dated 50 thousand plus years old and the the forensic work has revealed them to have been black

    As to the “forensic work” which has shown the skulls (sic) to be “black”, can you elaborate?
    Presumably you mean “covered with black skin”. N’est-ce pas? Then I infer that you are referring to the early kind of “forensic” evidence which relied – accurately enough in most circumstaances – on phrenology e.g the size and shape of the skull???

    What do DNA studies show? Links or references please.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Insignificant
    Lentini makes the most sense I have seen here so far. but I wont see much more however because this is as far as I go in here.
    most of this is white western rubbish to me, out of cultural marxism and post modern european claptrap... like religion created to misdirect the world. ..and all here seem seriously caught up in it.

    at university I walked away from the humanities and I warned my own children to steer clear..that if they were going to go major in humanities they would have to do so on their own
    happily they chose science and business

    on my own I studied Gerald Massey and found his body of work compelling. since then the black scholars have done yeoman work ..they are treasures e and well meant biology since
    then of course there is africa itself right there and all its works..like the Precession of the Equinoxes..the great year. then there is the second great year...Polar great year based on the precession of the pole stars

    how does one account for proven african history going back towards 100 thousand years with artifacts to prove? how to explain the forensic evidence of the rebuilt facial representation of skulls found in latin american, towards the southern tip that show black faces........

    then what about earthbound cyclic weather as far back as we can tell. they do not tell of human habitation anywhere other in africa as possible..in any time frame consistent with the humanity we have come to know as us, that we are a part of.

    europe has been telling lies about africa as soon as they were taught to speak and write, taught how to 'build a house with a window'.

    europe was/is sick mentally, crazy people with anti human conceptions of life...mostly homicidal maniacs involved in the massive extermination of humanity from as long as we have known them. if anything is hard to imagine is that the same human sources that gave rise to the magnificent people who built ancient Kemet are the same who gave rise to europeans..opposites that are really hard to reconcile for me. but that is what the evidence establishes

    the simple story seems to to be right there in front of us the rudiments of which cannot even be contemplated by the insanes I have been reading here. Gerald Massey dug deeply into africa through what the euros call egypt. but what else is there to dig into..where is the basis, evidence for alternate construction of human origins and history up to now...?

    I have found little here of substance, of use, to add to my impression of things. this has been almost a waste of time, the author a fool, a racially traumatized individual hell bent on the finding of, and assumption of some dreamed of white initial/initiating glory, evidence of which must be lying about somewhere awaiting our discovery. good luck to him

    As I said #11 I too found it hard to get much out of the article. However you leave me puzzled. As one with a scoentific bent and an interest in these matters I look in vain for your views on the rate of gene mutation in Malthusian human populations according to size and what bearing that might hsve had on observed, measured and supposed differences between what we conveniently call “races” (say intrabreeding extended family groups).

    Is there not evidence of specific genetic chsnges outdide Africa in the last 60,000 years which may have been selected for meeting cognitive challenges such as the Ice Ages must have presented?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Marshall Lentini
    Author is painfully under-read, like every other white nationalist who trundles into science. For them, conveniently, all of anthropology boils down to Franz Boas.

    The findings in Blombos Cave, just to name one case, have been assigned a range of 100,000 to 700,000 BP. And what are the artefacts? Ochre artwork, shell beads, stone and bone tools.

    And then there are the pesky facts of Khoisan and, to a lesser extent, Pygmy DNA (oldest lineages), evidence of a return to Africa and comingling ~80,000BP, etc.

    Once again white nationalists, in trying to correct extremism from the other side, overcompensate and pretend they themselves do not make emotional or ideological arguments: the need not to share anything with Africa is most apparent in all the breathless ad hoc.

    I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people. Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So…. sources and links please.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    "I have often speculated that the very black Nilotics of NE an E Africa were descended in part from immigrants returning to Africa from Eurasia but it had never occurred to me that the Khoi San or pygmies were also descended from return flows of people."

    There is no evidence that they do. Nilotic groups (with the exception of a few with minor Cushitic admixture like the Massai and similar tribes who have some Cushitic ancestry as mentioned in the link) generally have little to no Eurasian ancestry (the purer Nilotes/Nilo-Saharans are concentrated around South and Central Sudan—see Tishkoff, the indigenous East African "East Africa cluster", element predominates in them—and to lesser extent a few parts of Kenya/North Uganda). Pygmies and Khoisan do not really how evidence of such admixture (or Eurasian origins) either—they seem to have come mostly from very early diverging groups/branches of African homo sapiens that branched off within Africa even before the ancestors of most other subsaharan Africans did. One exception is minor admixture in several (especially pastoralist) Khoisan groups (introduced relatively recently, within the last few thousand years) coming from East African Cushites (who themselves had a minority or Eurasian ancestry) who brought pastoralism to the ancestors of some Khoisans like the Khoi Khoi.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilotic_peoples#Genetics

    http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-east-african-cluster.html

    Actually pygmies outside Africa seem to have been neglected. How for example did NE Australia come to have a pygmy negrito population? Not much discussed. So…. sources and links please.

    "Pygmies" from outside Africa (the various Negrito groups and the Andamanese) are not related to African Pygmies. their short stature evolved independently as they settled in various similar tropical forest environments (convergent evolution). There are several studies on them.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/07/asian-negritos-are-not-one-population/#.WYMYw3eZOqk

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito#Genetics

    Australia was likely settled by a few (at least two main) waves of people migrating along the coast of South Asia (whose out-of-Africa ancestors had remained in southern lands and retained their dark skin and other tropical traits), that later mixed in various proportions. The first may have been Negrito-like (related to the Negritos of South East Asia), with later waves more similar, and perhaps then more related to, the taller and less kinky-haired "proto Australoid" types of South India. Proto-Negrito derived tendencies (and cultures) my have survived in some parts of Australia more than others, and of course in Tasmania (where the natives had Negrito traits—probably descending mostly-entirely from the aforementioned first wave).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    Edit: "(only a very small amount is Celtic and Germanic, or sometimes in some of the Eastern Ashkenazim also a tiny bit Slavic)"

    I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help.

    My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair; then mentioning to a Rabbi/ historian that the Koestler story I had resd years before was hard to square with Yiddish being Germanic. His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans.

    My inference was that enterprising Celtic women had made sure successful but lonely young Jewish merchants didn’t have to wait for a bride shipment from their homeland. (Cp. India for the East India Company’s first 200 years).

    Then I noted Cochran’s emphasis on (northern I think) Italy and I could still see the Celtic connection because I recalled that Cisalpine Gaul was in fact most of northern Italy and that Gauls had sacked Rome in 390BC (remember the geese which saved the Capitol?).

    Before the end of the Western Roman Empire Goths had been recruited in large numbers yo the army and so many settled in Italy that those Germanic people had no trouble finishing off the Empire in the 5th century AD.

    So… I accept the importance of “Roman” or “Italian”
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool.

    I shsll welcome further info to put me right. And i thank aanyway you for prompting a new thought, namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy just ss the owners of beautiful Roman villas and the commanders of Romsn legions did from Britain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    "My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair;"

    By my observation (which is also extensive) Ashkenazim tend to be dark haired and light haired ones are a minority. They also(in coloring and features) tend to resemble the lighter skinned Middle Eastern types from the Levant/Eastern Med. area.; Lebanon, Syria, parts of Turkey Palestine, Armenia, to a lesser extent Greeks and S. Italians (all these peoples also have among themselves a non-trivial minority of lighter haired and light eyed types.)

    Brown head hair and read facial hair is not exclusive to Celts but can occur in other Europeans (and even a minority of pale Northern West Asians/North Middle Easterners)


    There is not a very significant amount if Germanic ancestry in Northern Italy. Genetic studies show that admixture after the early Roman era has mostly been minor (there is some pre-early Roman era Celtic admixture in parts of North Italy however, and the south has some Greek admixture).

    The more Northern Italians have always been a little lighter on average than those further south (though northerners also are mostly brunet rather than North European looking, if not mostly blackish-haired like many southerners or as dark on average as many southerners.

    "His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans."
    "...namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy..."

    The Ashkenazim mostly descend from Jews that arrived in Germany (mostly—but perhaps not exclusively from Italy and perhaps to some extent from southern France/South Gaul) late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (800s-1100s AD approximately)—as shown by, not only genetic, but also the cultural, historical, and linguistic evidence. The Jews that lived in southern Germany prior to that, likely mostly died out and/or were only a tiny element later absorbed (by non-Jews and/or by the later waves f Jews), and this would not have contributed very significantly to the Ashkenazim. The Jewish communities Ashkenazim descend from were likely around Central Italy (Rome, Tuscany), and to a lesser extent North and South Italy—though some fraction might have also been from southern Gaul (which was inhabited by the descendants of Romanized Celts). There is no evidence that they lived in Germany before South Europe, but rather they derived from Roman (often late antique) era Jewish migrants from the Near East who settled in Italy (and in some cases sometimes in Greece/Greek lands) and intermixed to a degree with southern European women.


    "So… I accept the importance of “Roman” or “Italian”
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool."

    The genetic studies show a predominance of southern European (especially Italian) in the European portion of Ashkenazic jewish ancestry (The Ashkenazim are most closely related genetically to the Italkic Jews—Ashkenazim come from a branch of medieval proto-Italkim that went into the Rhineland, descendants of the ancient and early medieval jewish community of Italy. Their second closest relatives are the Sephardim, whose ancestors are also a mix of Levantine and south European because they left the Levant and migrated West across Roman N. Africa—likely living in heavilyGreek Alexandria and mixing somewhat with Greeks—until they got to Spain.

    "The time and place of European admixture in Ashkenazi Jewish history"

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644

    "AJ appeared in Europe in the 10th century, and their ancestry is thought to comprise European (EU) and Middle-Eastern (ME) components"..."The major source of EU ancestry in AJ was found to be Southern Europe (≈60–80% of EU ancestry),"

    Ashkenazic ancestry is about half Levantine, and close to half southern European (60-80% of the European ancestry is southern), with the rest being other European.

    "I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help."

    Cochran talks about it below (Ashkenazic European admixture is mostly-largely Italian (there could be some Celtic element—likely at least a little—but it is small, and the Germanic element generally smaller). He (Cochran) is likely incorrect however, about the very common Ashkenazic K mtdna haplotype (maternal lineage) not being Middle Eastern, as its Middle Eastern origin has been supported, not only by Behar, but by the recent Fernandez study (though many other Ashhenazic mtdna/maternal lineages—perhaps slightly over about half of them, with the paternal lineages being mostly Levantine/Mid Eastern—are in fact South European).

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/jewish-moms/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews#Female_lineages:_Mitochondrial_DNA

    "A 2014 study by Fernández et al. has found that Ashkenazi Jews display a frequency of haplogroup K in their maternal DNA that suggests an ancient Near Eastern origin, similar to the results of Behar. He stated that this observation clearly contradicts the results of the study led by Richards that suggested a European source for 3 exclusively Ashkenazi K lineages."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Truth
    You keep putting up 50 page articles that you did not read and don't understand: "Variation in the molecular clock of primates", what the fuck is that?

    Show me an article that PROVES CONCLUSIVELY that human beings are descended from chimpanzees. You cannot, because it is a THEORY.

    Taking a theory as a fact is called "religion."

    For instance, getting back to the myth I was debating with the other fine gentleman; here is a literal Space Shuttle and International Space Station Astro-naught, when asked why we don't go back to the moon.

    Believe me, his response is worth your time...


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxJbQpdYINg

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-1

    India’s lunar mission.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/new-photos-of-the-china-moon-landing-mission-2016-2

    China’s lunar mission.

    We (americans) went there 6 times. We left little mirrors on several missions. Universitys all over the world can point a laser at these little mirrors and measure the distance to the moon. If you had a powerful enough laser and a precise enough rig for it, you could do it yourself.

    That video is…. Well idk. I dont know who he is, and his eyes look a bit off, like he was recently concussed.

    You keep linking videos of crazy people. The person that made that video had several spelling errors and grammer errors, and not basic ones that are common and excusable. Seems like you keep getting (((wrong))) info from people that are both uneducated, and dumb. Those are not mutually exclusive, fyi. Dont want to have to post again correcting you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    So you believe Don Petit, the longest running Astro-naught in the history of NASA's explanation that we cannot return to the moon because "we lost 1967 technology and cannot re-create it"?

    I did not make this up, I linked him saying it earlier. You actually believe this?

    All space programs around the world, are an excuse to funnel tax monies into black-ops programs. Nothing more nothing less.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit

    I was an atheist for the first 25 years of my life, a zen Buddhist for the next 25, and believe me Sir, If I so desired, I could make your argument better than you, on stage behind a podium without notes. Just believe me on this, It came to my understanding that everything in our common life; evolution, outer space, etc. is simply a blaspheme of God and the bible, so I converted to Christianity.


    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+104%3A5-19&version=NIV

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jm8
    Most of the 50 or so per cent of non-Semitic ancestry in Ashkenazim is Roman/Italian rather than Celtic or Germanic (only a very small amount is Celtic and Germanic, or sometimes Slavic)—Cochran (as well was the dna studies) says as much too—(their ancestors entered Europe through Italy and intermixed with Europeans much less after they arrived in Germany from Italy), or possibly Greco/Italo-Roman. But otherwise, you are correct (the other 50 percent or so—perhaps slightly over 50—of course being Semitic/Levantine).

    Edit: “(only a very small amount is Celtic and Germanic, or sometimes in some of the Eastern Ashkenazim also a tiny bit Slavic)”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I recall the Cochran references to Italy but I am nor aware of his denying the Celtic (or Germanic). Maybe you can help.

    My path to knowing about the European element came from the observation going back decaades that Jews often had blue eyes and even red hair and even my own Celtic colouring of brown head hair but red facial hair; then mentioning to a Rabbi/ historian that the Koestler story I had resd years before was hard to square with Yiddish being Germanic. His reply affirmed my disbelief and included the lively line that there were Jews in the Rhineland before there were Germans.

    My inference was that enterprising Celtic women had made sure successful but lonely young Jewish merchants didn't have to wait for a bride shipment from their homeland. (Cp. India for the East India Company's first 200 years).

    Then I noted Cochran's emphasis on (northern I think) Italy and I could still see the Celtic connection because I recalled that Cisalpine Gaul was in fact most of northern Italy and that Gauls had sacked Rome in 390BC (remember the geese which saved the Capitol?).

    Before the end of the Western Roman Empire Goths had been recruited in large numbers yo the army and so many settled in Italy that those Germanic people had no trouble finishing off the Empire in the 5th century AD.

    So... I accept the importance of "Roman" or "Italian"
    as a geographic description of many ancestors but not as an identifier of the gene pool.

    I shsll welcome further info to put me right. And i thank aanyway you for prompting a new thought, namely, that by the time western Europe became Germanic after the last tumultuous centuries of the Empire Jewish merchants maay well hsve retreated to Italy just ss the owners of beautiful Roman villas and the commanders of Romsn legions did from Britain.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @RaceRealist88
    "You keep putting up 50 page articles that you did not read"

    How do you know?

    "and don’t understand"

    Wrong.

    "“Variation in the molecular clock of primates”, what the fuck is that?"

    At least you clicked the link. Not many do that.

    The molecular clock is the average rate of mutations that a species' genome incurs. This is used to measure divergence times from a common ancestor.

    "Show me an article that PROVES CONCLUSIVELY that human beings are descended from chimpanzees. You cannot, because it is a THEORY."

    I just did. Mutations incurred in the genome slowed down considerably in our genomes after the split.

    Theory---a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

    You're not using the term correctly.

    https://richarddawkins.net/2015/11/is-it-a-theory-is-it-a-law-no-its-a-fact/

    A theory explains observed phenomena. The theory of gravity. Species change. This is a fact.

    "Taking a theory as a fact is called “religion.”"

    Believing this is an intelligent statement is called "ignorance".

    Just because you don't believe in evolution through natural selection doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It's a fact, evolution is the only game in town. No other theory has the explanatory power of evolution.

    You’re not getting it, Sport, I’ll try again:

    Evolution is a theory.

    Water flowing downhill is a scientific fact.

    I’m not sure how else I can explain this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "Evolution is a theory"

    .... Reread my comment. You creationists don't know what the word "theory" means.
    , @Anonymous

    You’re not getting it, Sport, I’ll try again:

    Evolution is a theory.
     
    LOL. You're not getting it, Beavis. Evolution is a fact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    I'm sure you can find it easily enough online. It seems Koestler was attracted to the idea of saying Ashkenazi Jews weren't Semites as some sort of protection from anti-Semitism and leapt atthe idea of extrapolating from the conversion of a tiny minority of important Kazars. Obvious rubbish to anyone who had studied the actual well recorded history of Ashkenazim or just noted that they wouldn't have acquired Yiddish, a German dialect, if they came from the East. Now of course the DNA evidence is in and, according to Greg Cochran the 50 or so per cent of non-Semitic ancestry is nearly all Celtic or Germanic.

    Most of the 50 or so per cent of non-Semitic ancestry in Ashkenazim is Roman/Italian rather than Celtic or Germanic (only a very small amount is Celtic and Germanic, or sometimes Slavic)—Cochran (as well was the dna studies) says as much too—(their ancestors entered Europe through Italy and intermixed with Europeans much less after they arrived in Germany from Italy), or possibly Greco/Italo-Roman. But otherwise, you are correct (the other 50 percent or so—perhaps slightly over 50—of course being Semitic/Levantine).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jm8
    Edit: "(only a very small amount is Celtic and Germanic, or sometimes in some of the Eastern Ashkenazim also a tiny bit Slavic)"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.