From Google: “I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.” … “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said. “

She has a funny idea about what “open” means. She could have linked to the document, and explained where it goes wrong. That should have been more convincing if she had good facts and arguments to support her opinions. Instead, she mainly hopes that fewer people read the essay.

One possibility is that the Google CEO is successfully covering up embarrassing or illegal employment practices that are making a lot of money for the company. If so, there could be a business justification for keeping him.

It is funny how “unapologetic progressive and inclusive” means excluding certain viewpoints.

If Jews are just pursuing their group interests, then their only serious rivals are white Christians. So they will do anything to boost the interests of Jews, and undermine white Christians. Importing Muslims is the best thing that they can do to undermine white Christians.

Sure, a lot of Moslems are antisemitic and anti-Zionist. But a lot of American Jews don’t care what 20yo Moslem students are tweeting. It does not affect them. It is much more important to undermine white Christians, because in their view white Christians control America,

Interesting theory, but what would be the genetic mechanism? If the cause is genetic, then either the gays are reproducing, or their relatives are somehow propagating their genes.

You probably won’t recommend Teen Vogue for your teenaged daughter.

NY Post:

Teen Vogue’s “Guide to Anal Sex” is sparking a slew of outrage — including one mom so incensed, she burned a copy of the mag.

The magazine posted the guide earlier this month, touting it as “the lowdown on everything you need to know about butt stuff, no matter who you are, whom you’re having sex with, or who you want to have sex with.”

“This is anal 101, for teens, beginners, and all inquisitive folk,” it reads.

It is funny to see elite Jews complaining about non-Jews and eugenics. Jews have practiced eugenics more than any other ethnic group. Apparently they want to keep their secret to themselves, so that they can better compete against non-Jews.

One of Fine’s arguments is that she denies that men take more risks that women. She admits that men do more things that look risky, like tight-rope walking, but argues that those men take a lot of safety precautions so that they are not taking as much risk as it looks. On the other hand, women take more risks in other ways, such as buying lottery tickets! They just recklessly risk their money without doing anything the mitigate the risk.

For some scientists who do acknowledge sex differences, and dispute Fine, here are a couple of examples.
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/old-t-rex/
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/are-male-and-female-brains-absolutely-identical/

This is brilliant. It is so good that I cannot tell whether it is satire or not.

It was known that Europeans are descended from Neanderthals, and from Africans who left Africa 50 years ago. This research opens the possibility of those African ancestors having light skin, as they brought some of the genes for light skin.

Some Africans have the gene for light skin, but do not actually have light skin. So there are presumably other genes influencing skin color, not covered by this study.

The Atlantic article tries to imply that this info should be upsetting to white supremacists. I don’t see why.

Gelman is merciless on those he accuses of sloppy statistics or ethical errors.

If you over-sell your results, you could get criticism in proportion to the over-selling. I do not think that rule has changed.

The key to reading these articles is to assume that the author might have the cause-and-effect backwards.

They could only use DNA to determine that the sex was male. Some of those mammoths could have identified as a different gender.

Maybe “white” will soon be synonymous with “white supremacist”, and hence not a race at all. Whites may have to check “other” or some euphemism that has not been invented yet.

If Silverio really meant what he said, then when is he going to expel the cadet who wrote those horrible and racist messages?

Here is another hate hoax.

A black man confessed to spraying a racist graffiti on his own car as a Halloween prank, Kansas police said on Monday.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/07/man-admits-spraying-racist-graffiti-on-his-own-car-police-said.html

A white student would have been expelled for racist messages. But not a black student? Apparently punishment is based on the color of the student’s skin.

Andrew Anglin is a fan of Taylor Swift, and he posts trolling neo-Nazi articles. Is that part of the problem with her?

She has threatened to sue those who associate her with white supremacy.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/taylor-swift-threatens-to-sue-blogger-who-connected-her-to-white-supremacists/

I hope they spend 2 hours pondering our current state of hysteria.

Yes, systemic racism is built into ice cream, because it is engineered for the enjoyment of lactose tolerant white people.

Wow. Stephens says that Bannon is a Zionist, but the Zionist Organization of America should snub him because he was the editor of Breitbart when it published an article about the Alt-Right that mentioned Richard Spencer as founding, with intellectuals, a web site “accused of racism”.

Stephens says “Connect the dots.”

It may be bad for Jews to encourage people to make these sort of “connect the dots” arguments. We might connect the dots on Stephens.

The internet worked just fine without regulation for most of its history. A couple of years ago, the Obama administration decided to start regulating it, with 100s of pages of net neutrality rules.

My problem with net neutrality is that Google, Facebook, and Twitter have lobbied to exempt themselves from the rules. They can call themselves ISPs when the law benefits them, but they also reserve the right to block content on their network however they see fit.

So net neutrality is really just a big power play so companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter will have exclusive control over the content that most users see.

For years, the Silicon Valley companies pleaded for no regulation of the internet. Now apparently they are big and powerful enough that their lobbyists can control the regulators, so they welcome certain regulatory efforts.

A lot of regulations exist to benefit big business, not consumers. Net neutrality is an example.

Actually, Google has seized Andrew Anglin’s web site, and blocked it. The reasons were purely political, such as disapproval of his comments about the Charlottesville protesters.

It is true that you can still find him on Tor, and currently on a Hong Kong site. There would presumably be such work-arounds for sites that Comcast might block.

60 million American voted for Trump. If it turns out that a pop star was one of them, then why is that so disturbing?

Trump has also been ignoring another pop icon.

During his recent interview, Eminem expressed his frustrations with Trump ignoring his BET freestyle. “I was and still am extremely angry,” the “Walk on Water” artist said. “I can’t stand that motherf**ker. I feel like he’s not paying attention to me. I was kind of waiting for him to say something and for some reason, he didn’t say anything.”
https://www.bet.com/music/2017/11/20/eminem-donald-trump-bet-cypher.html

The NY Times says it removed the link to the site selling swastika armbands.

Did anyone save it? Some readers here might want to do some Christmas shopping.

How many politicians are being blackmailed right now?

I assume that many politicians are as vulnerable as Al Franken and Roy Moore. An accuser can blab to the Wash. Post, or demand a confidential settlement. Or perhaps demand votes on particular issues. Or maybe make a deal with a middle man, where the middle man pays cash to the accuser and demands votes from the politician.

Possible. Or maybe the blackmailers only increased their demands when Hastert started making millions of dollars. Or maybe Hastert retired and became a lobbyist to meet the demands of his blackmailer.

Regardless, this is very bad for democratic government. If a politician can be destroy by unverifiable complaints from decades ago, then the blackmail possibilities are huge.

The embarrassing truth is that nearly all the other talk therapies are unproven also.

California has already been invaded by foreigners, and controlled by forces hostile to Americanism. Maybe we should revive some World War II terms for those who cooperated with occupying powers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_the_Axis_Powers_during_World_War_II
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborationism

Two sets of twins? These days that normally means IVF, not natural conception.

The case against Sandusky is as wildly implausible as those against Duke lacrosse and Haven Monahan. You have to believe that Sandusky would take underage boys to a semi-public college shower, anally rape a boy where others can see him, have McQueary see it and not make any attempt to stop it or call police, have McQueary only realize that he witnessed a rape years later, etc.

There were no witnesses against Sandusky except for those who had recovered memories many years later, and who were suing the college for millions of dollars.

The Sandusky case was unique because of an eagerness to create a financial liability for the college. That sort of collective tolerance for anal rape of young boys is not something that happens anywhere in America.

Yes, McQueary counts as a witness. However, he was also a plaintiff who sued for millions of dollars, and collected. And there is no record of him ever saying anything about anal rape until many years later. By his own admission, he did nothing to intervene in whatever it was that he saw.

There are other examples of child abuse prosecutions based largely on wild accusations and public hysteria. In some cases, men (and women) went to prison, only to be exonerated later.

You’re right, I have zero faith in our legal system when 100% of the evidence is from recovered memories of events from many years earlier.

Paterno did ban Sandusky from bringing boys onto the campus in 2002. He also said that any criminal allegations should be reported to the police. What more would you want him to do? Nobody told him of an anal rape allegation.

If you were a 25yo top athlete witnessing an old fart anally rape a young boy in a college shower, would you (1) intervene, and save the boy; (2) call 911 and make a police report; or (3) suddenly make an issue of it 9 years later in connection with your lawsuit against the college for millions of dollars?

McQueary chose (3), according to his own story.

About $100 million was bled out of Penn State. A lot of bloodsuckers were in on it, and to justify it, they had to blame top Penn State officials. So they had to be framed and convicted. Follow the money.

The real issue isn’t whether Sandusky ever inappropriately touched a boy. This was a huge national news story because Penn State was alleged to have a football culture that openly tolerated anally raping young boys.

I would be very shocked if such a thing could exist in America today. From the evidence I see, it did not.

The witch hunt continues. Guilty until proven innocent. Except that it does not appear that anyone is going to be proven innocent, or even to get a fair hearing.

Did the orangutan success vary with the ethnic background of the humans?

Does this mean that we are headed for Planet of the Apes?

Heidi Bond complains that her career was derailed, but she went on to clerk for two US supreme court justices, and to be a law professor.

Also she writes pornography for a living now, so I don’t think she would have been shocked to have been asked about porn.

The more these articles complain about invasive plants and animals, the better. We need more public awareness.

It is useful to have columnists who are consistently wrong. I am automatically suspicious of whatever he is promoting.

Statistician Gelman trashes Brooks again:

Consider the following range of responses to an outsider pointing out an error in your published work: …
4. Avoid looking into the question, ignore the possible error, act as if it had never happened, and keep making the same mistake over and over. …
David Brooks is a pretty solid 4 on that scale, which isn’t great but in retrospect is like a breath of fresh air, given the 6’s and 7’s we’ve been encountering lately.
http://andrewgelman.com/2018/01/30/education-maternity-leave-breastfeeding/

What if there is no sexual harassment, and each report is some sort combination of female fantasy and political statement. Then where were you expect a lot of reports?

NPR.

As I write this, Scott Simon on NPR News Weekend Edition is doing a rant on why he refuses to say “First Lady”. The term is sexist, and not mentioned in the Constitution.
https://www.npr.org/2018/02/03/582902910/why-i-dont-say-first-lady

With this mindset at NPR, they probably have a very expansive view of what sexual harassment is.

Supposedly Donna Zuckerberg is writing a book attacking the Alt Right. I am looking forward to it. Anyone have an update on it?

Has Cape Town run out of water yet? That will be a sign of decolonization.

Someday historians will wonder why we imported millions of unskilled laborers, just as the robots were destroying the need for them.

That is why we had the slave trade, 250 years ago. I hope Bush keeps reminding everyone.

Yes, let’s keep debating all the pros and cons of expanding the modern slave trade.

The Out of Africa theory claimed that an African migration from about 50,000 years ago completely displaced all other hominids, and that modern humans are essentially the same as what left Africa at that time.

The theory has been refuted by Neanderthal and Denosivan DNA. The Africans interbred with other hominids, and did not completely displace them. Furthermore, there has been considerable human evolution in the last 50k years.

Saying that Neanderthal contribution was only 2% makes it sound insignificant, but there is currently no agreement about the significance of that 2-3%.

The average of 6% and 15% is 10.5%, not 12%.

I hated “Pretty Woman”, but I have met several women who loved it. I even had a nanny tell me that her mom says that it is her favorite movie of all time!

So it appears that a lot of women like those sexist stereotypes.

Even if Spanish-American settlers were real Americans, what does that have to do with Mexicans?

Mexicans speak the same language as Spain, but not the same as the USA.

Google had this problem with its Google doodles. So it quit recognizing straight white cis males, and finding every excuse it could to put diversity into its doodles. Maybe the NY Times obituaries will do the same.

I thought that the Out Of Africa theory was disproved when it was shown that non-Africans have Neanderthal genes. And again with the discovery of Denosivan genes.

The Out Of Africa theory was used to claim that all humans are essentially the same. No one wants to give up that claim.

“Races,” as described by Linnaeus in the 1700’s or on the U.S. census of 2010, group Koreans, Mongolians, Sri Lankans and Pakistanis together (as the “Asian” race);

No, this is false. You can read the 2010 Census race questions. The questionnaire distinguishes between Koreans, Chinese, and Asian Indians.

Saying “suggestion that race has been overlooked until now” is also wrong. No one suggested that.

The article is about Asperger Syndrome, not Asperger’s.

The term is just a slur against those with a nerdy personality type. It has been taken over by pop psychology, and abandoned by serious workers. Go ahead and keep using the term, but remember that it is widely misunderstood.

The article ends with: “let’s work on identifying and rectifying the contexts that lead to low scores on IQ tests in the first place.”

If DNA is leading to those low scores, then how is he going to rectify it?

Can someone please filter out all the PC euphemisms, and tell me in plain english what the new research found?

It is amazing to see evolutionists deny evolution. How does he think that evolution ever worked, without group differences in heritable traits? If conditions drove the evolution in intelligence in the first place, then they can still drive differences in intelligence.

As others have pointed out, humans have lots of advantageous traits over animals. Probably the biggest is being social. We can form very large societies. You do not see this in other animals, except mainly ants and bees.

It is not clear that high intelligence is needed for sociability. Maybe societies have to kill of their most intelligent members because they exploit the social structure for their own good, or because they don’t believe in the gods.

Tully is being marketed as a romantic comedy, while it is really a horror movie. Is that right?

If so, I think that you should tell us the Big Plot Twist. People should not get Rosemary’s Baby when they are expecting a romantic comedy.

A lot of other changes would be needed to get people marrying and having kids younger. There would have to be cultural and legal changes to undo what has changed in the last 50 years.

Modestly upbeat ending? Okay, I will take your word for it. I don’t know how upbeat it can be when a new mom turns out to have a severe mental illness. Such things are not usually curable.

I never believed the claim that babies and toddlers benefit from hearing spoken conversations with a large vocabulary. I believe that toddlers are better off hearing a restricted vocabulary, so that they can better understand meaning and syntax. That is much more important that being to recognize a lot of words.

So I was skeptical about that 1995 research anyway.

That article has a lot of innuendo, without actually saying that Peterson is wrong about anything. I get the impression that truth is not the main concern of the Jews who are quoted.

Steve and others say that Peterson is “a high-brow traditionalist pro-Western civilization intellectual.”

Vox Day says the opposite, more or less.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/darkstream-jordan-peterson-is-globalist.html
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-dog-whistler.html

I am still trying to figure it out. I want to give Peterson credit for refusing to use weird pronouns, but that was the position of 99% of the population until a couple of years ago. That could either show that he is principled, or that he is just slow to adapt.

Having spent a lot of time with 4yo kids, I think that the story is plausible.

The bizarre part is the reaction of the Africans. What kind of jerk call a 4yo child a “white supremacist” for merely noticing skin color and making an innocent comment?

It is a fact that whites usually marry whites and brown skinned folks usually marry the brown skinned. Maybe he figured it out on his own, or maybe an adult explained it to him. It is not a statement of white supremacy.

It is bizarre to be so unsettled by such a casual remark from a 4yo child. Kids often say things that adults consider inappropriate.

It is also bizarre to say, “Did we just return to the 1960s?” The 1960s ended 50 years ago, and it is extremely unlikely that these Africans were in the American South at the time. They were not returning to anything. Their imaginations have gone wild, both about the 1960s and today.

How did we get to the point where a sheriff decides the intent of a barista using the word “Beaner”?

The term “social justice warrior” has the merit that it is not an offensive slur, like “commie” and some of the other suggestions. The SJWs are proud to be battling for social justice.

The term pozness needs some explanation. I think it has something to do with people who are proud to be HIV positive, or people who wish to show solidarity with those who are HIV positive, or those who like the way HIV positivity unifies the gay community. I am not sure exactly, so I hope someone explains it.

I keep waiting for Republicans to learn the lessons of Trump’s win, and to replicate his formula for success. So far, not too much.

If Trump is not running in 2020, then I expect that someone will figure it out by then.

“Liberal” is not the right word for Einstein. He was a member of several Communist front organizations. He was a Commie.

He wrote, “It would be a pity if these Chinese supplant all other races.”

It would be much more racist to say that it would be a good thing for Chinese to supplant all other races. Apparently it is now considered racist to have any opinion on the matter at all.

In this context, “realism” has a funny meaning. Realism is the belief that quantum mechanics should model aspects of atoms and particles that are not observable, so that the theory can tell us what is really going on in the atom.

The trouble is that the behavior of atoms and particles are not like anything in our ordinary experience, so attempts for a more intuitive realistic understanding of the sort that Einstein wanted have failed.

Einstein later wrote, “I have always condemned the use of the atomic bomb against Japan.”
http://www.doug-long.com/einstein.htm

Einstein wanted to nuke Germany, but not Russia or Japan. That should tell us enough about how much he liked Germany.

Yes, Germany was suspected of working on an atomic bomb, but so were Russia and Japan.

Here is the wrong part: “60 percent of public school children in the state of Arizona today are minorities.”

If the kids are 40% white, then the whites are minorities. It makes more sense to say that the schools are 100% minorities.

The following sentences are just obvious facts.

Wow, this post sure triggered a lot of bicyclist-haters. Lighten up, guys. The bicyclists have a right to use the road also.

Jewish newspaper. Jewish columnist. Idolizes Israel. Condescending. Claims superior morals and intelligence. Cites anti-Semitism. Lectures us on what is un-American. Makes comparison to Israeli immigration, but skips the part about Israel only letting Jews in. Doesn’t mention Hitler, but trashes Trump as if he were Hitler.

These guys are getting very predictable.

If you believe in the blank slate, and if you notice the vast diversity of student outcomes in schools, then it seems obvious that schools can be radically improved, and that some scientific experiments will show us how.

Gates is known to be a huge fan of Steven Pinker. Has he read The Blank Slate?

Does UC Berkeley ever sponsor left-wing speakers?

I am sure it does. It has left-wing professors like Judith Butler. Still, it would be interesting to compare how many hours of views like Ann Coulter it gets per year, versus how many hours of left-wingers.

That Obama speech did not really oppose the Iraq War. It merely expressed some concerns. Many of the war advocates shared some of those same concerns.

“the single dumbest policy decision of the 21st Century” — maybe, but I don’t think we have any consensus about what made it so dumb.

Loose women are going to attract more men making sexual advances. Isn’t that obvious?

Men do not usually waste effort on conservative women who appear to be sexually faithful to their husbands.

Also, conservative women are more likely to believe in individual responsibility, and deal with a problem herself, as opposed to liberals who like to portray women as victims.

Will someone please explain this to me? I would like to learn from the mistakes of others.

Roseanne Barr was treated harshly. That is a fact. Does anyone deny it? He comments about MeToo were about general trends, not his personal opinion. What’s the problem?

“Population growth in Africa is a challenge”

Yeah, and CO2 growth in the atmosphere is a challenge.

Which is the bigger challenge?

Perhaps the thinking is that race is something that blacks have, but that whites do not. White is not really a race, but the absence of a race.

I am not sure if Chinese have a race under this thinking.

Somehow Google has convinced everyone that their search is not biased because it uses a trade secret algorithm. Eventually the public will figure out that the argument does not even make any sense. The algorithm is tuned by the work of thousands of engineers, and of course it is biased.

Men are able to reason logically. Women let their emotionally opinions cloud their thinking. As evidence, just look at articles by men and women on this subject.

“Why else would organizations offer confidence workshops for women, rather than modesty training for men?”

Lots of reasons that have little to do with sex differences. Confidence helps in many situations. Modesty is easy, and does not require a workshop to learn.

More precisely, Democrats get most of their support from hatred of White Christian men.

What do Muslims and Jews have in common? Both religions are antagonistic to Christianity. Polls show that Muslims, Jews, atheists, and other non-Christians vote Democrat, overwhelmingly.

It is funny to hear immigration advocates make a point of saying that a crime was committed by a child of immigrants, not an immigrant.

The immigration problem is much worse if the first and second generation children have every opportunity to assimilate, but still become terrorists.

So Jews might lose their grip on the feminist movement? I started to say this might be a good thing, but the replacements are probably crazier women.

So Whites are the least prejudiced and most cucked ethnic group on Earth? That is consistent with my experience.

Forget about whether E. Warren exaggerated her Cherokee heritage. The creepy thing about her is that he appears to be embarrassed about being White.

A large part of the Jewish religion is a belief that Jews are a persecuted minority. Just look at the Exodus Passover and Nazi Holocaust stories, and how important these are to Jews. The belief is a significant of what binds Jews together. Jews could all be millionaires, and they would still maintain this belief.

Also hilarious, and ongoing for a long time:

Google search for “American computer scientists”, and you get Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and no blacks.

Obviously most American parents do not believe Harris, as the trend is towards spending more and more time, effort, and money on child-rearing.

I think one flaw in her analysis is that parents are subject to peer influence. Mothers tend to use the same parenting methods that their friends and neighbors do.

So maybe parenting does not seem to make much difference because so few parents are willing to actually do something different from the other parents.

The issue is what happens if we “ever let Islam become a large part of our society”. I don’t see how any non-Moslem could think that would improve the USA. It would be a disaster.

Let’s broaden the category to include their entire style of thinking. Why are they still around?