1) Weird search query of the week: “choropleth of jehovah witness population.”
2 Your weekly fluff fix:
1) Post from the past: Genetics is One: Mendelism and quantitative traits
3) Please note that I don’t endorse the views of the “comment of the week”! Comment of the week, in response to “1 in 3 Iranian men ‘gay’?”:
I think you are a bunch of idiots trying to judge everything with your nonsensical mindset.
I am a man and have fucked boys in Iran when I was at high school. They were supposedly gay and we used to call them sissy boys. So, will that make me gay? No! I did that because girls were not accessible. Also at a younger age `fucking somebody’ meant `proving your superiority’. Even now, I would happily fuck you mf* to show who has the upper hand!
But this sort of affairs would mostly happen between bullies and sissies. The rest 90% of children were immune of such activities. Those of us who did such things a couple of times also gave up doing so as we became more mature. I think you are out of your mind if you think 30% of men are gay or those unmarried are involved with other men!! You come up with such ideas only because your fucked-up society is so obsessed with gays, gayness, gay rights, etc.
As Ahmadinejad said, “we don’t have gays in Iran”! But we are happy to export our sissy boys to your fucked-up societies, as I am sure you will enjoy their company, since you new-generation nerdish westerners have turned gays yourselves.
1) Post from the past: Why does race matter for women?
3) Comment of the week, in response to “Smart educated men less likely to think cheating always wrong”:
BTW – the most interesting bit in that chart is the difference between atheists and agnostics. It makes sense when I think about it. To say one is an atheist rather than an agnostic requires a level of certainty towards ones beliefs. If there was a way to tease out relativism I’d lay good odds more agnostics are relativists than atheists are.
4) And finally, your weekly fluff fix:
1) Post from the past: The wisdom of Seinfeld. How far in the past? When I wrote this it was closer to the series finale of Seinfeld than to now!
3) Comment of the week, in response to “Cave of Forgotten Dreams, see it, but tune the narration out”:
You are not the first person to misspell his first name “Werner” in that manner, many do it with purpose to undercut the man and discredit his films (though I assume you would argue a minor overlook and/or simple mistake). His films continue to command viewing decades after their making and his legend grows with that.
Is it a perfect film? -No.
Is it an essential film? – Absolutely.
Was the scientific element that you vented about present? -Yes
If there was more scientific informations would we have missed out on the humanity of it? -Yes
“Humaness” as it was put in the film has much a place in the culture of man as the sciences of explanation. This was easily the best film to date of 2011, and the best film period I have seen in 3 years. Regardless of whether these Chauvet caves are ever filmed again or not, people in 100 years will still know of this film. Our grandchildren’s grandchildren who will not even know our names from their family trees will have access to this film when the Hangover Part II’s and the other films like it that are worthless in the “Humaness” sense will be forgotten in even the footnotes of history. Like it or not, Werner’s annoying commentary (annoying to you Razib) has just become the official voice of authority on the Chauvet Cave of our generation to all the generations of the world to come. He may not be Jean-Marie Chauvet or his colleagues, but unto future generations he will be like unto Howard Carter, Gertrude Bell and even Hemingway.
Been a while since I did some bonus kat photos, so here it goes….