The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Saini: "Sports and IQ: the Persistence of Race ‘science’ in Competition"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Nature:

Sports and IQ: the persistence of race ‘science’ in competition

I don’t actually know what this headline means other than: Angela Saini No Like!

Angela Saini assesses a book examining how bad science lingers.
Angela Saini

23 JULY 2019

Kenyan athletes are often subject to debate over their supposed genetic advantage at distance running.

Skin Deep: Journeys in the Divisive Science of Race Gavin Evans OneWorld (2019)

… In Skin Deep, the writer and media lecturer dissects the dubious pseudoscientific arguments still used to justify racism. In my latest book, Superior, I cover similar ground (see R. Nelson Nature 570, 440–441; 2019). Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.

Racism in science: the taint that lingers

But today’s political environment reminds us that the concept of deep, unassailable differences between population groups persists. Race ‘science’ — that is, research that looks at the existence and scope of these differences — has to some extent been purged from biology. The vast majority of human genetic variation is today understood to be individual — that is, people from different populations can easily be more similar, genetically, than people from the same population. But the persistence of everyday racism, the perception of regional cultural differences and the use of racial categories such as ‘Caucasian’ in medicine, employment and official data-gathering blind too many to this fact.

Evans zooms in on two focal points of racial stereotypes: sport and intelligence. His section on the success of Kenyan marathon runners in global contests is brilliant: it demolishes the idea of genetic explanations for any region’s sporting achievements. Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function. Evans notes, however, that we don’t make such generalizations about white British athletes when they do disproportionately well in global athletics.

Actually, despite their presumed cultural advantages because they invented so many of the world’s leading sports, the British haven’t done all that well in global athletics in recent generations, until putting on a well-funded push at the 2012 London Olympics. And the big star was Mogadishu born Mo Farah, an East African.

Such claims for athletic prowess are lazy biological essentialism, heavily doped with racism.

Angela Saini isn’t all that bright, but she’s a very feminine lady, so she knows about as much about sports as I know about soap operas.

Also she’s proud of her Indian heritage and India’s Olympics motto is: Hey, at least we’re better than Bangladesh.

My emphasis on Kenyan running is because the sharp differences in performance at different lengths of races solves the methodological problem of distinguishing between ability and desire.

For example, the Japanese dominated sumo wrestling up into the 1980s.

But was that because the Japanese are naturally gigantic or was it because they were the only ones who cared about sumo wrestling?

(Since then, bigger races have done very well in Japanese sumo, such as Samoans, Mongolians and Bulgarians.)

In running, however, while Kenyans have won Olympic medals at all distances from the marathon down to the 400m and 4x400m relay, they’ve never come close to medaling at 200m or 100m.

When I crunched the data in 1997, the Kenyan bell curve was distributed with a high point at 3000 meters (both steeplechase and flat).

Okay, here are the current Kenyan Olympic medal totals, 1964-2016, by distance of running race:

It’s hard to offer any cultural explanation for why Kenyans would pass up easy money in the short sprints, while dominating in the distances.

On the other hand: just look at them.

While 100m dash Olympians tend to be extremely muscular, the Kenyans who do well in track tend to be extremely slender.

Here’s Eliud Kipchoge, Kenya’s 2016 marathon gold medalist. He is 5′-5″ and 123 pounds. In contrast, Jamaica’s 2016 100m gold medalist, Usain Bolt, is 6′-5″ and 207 pounds.

… The politics of our age demand that we counteract ‘scientific’ racism not only with rigour, depth and empathy, but also without fear. Evans takes no prisoners. He skewers the psychologist Steven Pinker, for instance, for entertaining the theories of anthropologists Gregory Cochran, Jason Hardy and the late Henry Harpending, who claim that evolutionary pressures have led to psychological differences between populations. In 2009, at the ‘Preserving Western Civilization’ conference in Baltimore, Maryland, Harpending stated, bizarrely: “I’ve never seen anyone with a hobby in Africa.”

So, obviously, that stereotype must be WRONG! How often does Saturday Night Live make the basis of sketches the cliche that people in Africa seldom have hobbies? Well, that’s just due to the nonstop media indoctrination you are all exposed to about how Africans don’t have hobby.

Oh, wait … Actually, now that I think about it, that’s not a stereotype at all. The only person I have ever heard making that observation is Henry Harpending, Distinguished Professor of anthropology at the U. of Utah, member of the National Academy of Sciences, Harvard Ph.D., and author of The Structure of an African Pastoralist Community based on his years of fieldwork in Africa.

On the other hand, London journalist Angela Saini points and sputters at Harpending’s observation.

Who are you going to believe about life in Africa: Dr. Harpending or Angela D. Saini? My guess is that Saini knows as much about Africa as she knows about sports.

Or science.

 
Hide 252 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Saini is part of the new master elite . So deplorable s have to now down.

    • Replies: @istevefan
    Only because you allow it. Heck, not only do you allow it, you actually helped this to occur in a way by denouncing patriots like Pat Buchanan who tried to end the immivasion.
  2. It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    She is an Indian who is outraged--outraged, I say!--that white people sometimes generalize about black people.
    I guess I can see that. When I hear Cubans talking smack about Mexicans,it makes my blood BOIL!!!
    , @Dieter Kief
    Angela Saini is bright (and good looking, hehe) enough to succeed. As long as you play (= suppose/argue) that sloppy, she will dominate your game. Handle this case like Steve Sailer does it - once again in a quite brilliant manner: Don't underestimate Angela Saini.
    , @SFG
    She believes what she wants to believe. Pretty common really.
    , @Lot
    She’s dishonest, which is why she attacks a strawman of “deep, unassailable differences between population groups.”

    That’s just a bunch of vague modifiers. Does Steve or anyone else who studies group differences claim they are “deep and unassailable?” What does that even mean?

    How about “persistent and grounded in genetic differences?” That’s concrete and well established by many scientific studies.
    , @TWS
    Her job is to simply contradict the truth.
    , @AndrewR
    Probably a bit of all three. I don't think she's exceptionally bright, and I don't think she completely believes everything she says, but I do think she does get high off her own supply.
    , @Unladen Swallow
    She is not playing dumb, she just sees what she wants to, which the dominant ideology of our time. She never questions it.
    , @lavoisier
    Her work is published because the people who control the discourse want her work to be published.

    Nothing more than that.

    For her part she is a moron.
  3. • Replies: @El Dato

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California
     
    The commuter time would become *terrible*. And the beach - there would have to be waiting lists. And the littering, the littering, man!

    Somebody should finally make a movie out of Stand on Zanzibar.
    , @Daniel H
    Never mind that a billion people could easily be housed in California alone, not even the nation's largest state by area, and it would still be less crowded than the Bronx. Jason Riley.


    How does one even reason with a moron like this.

    I really loathe libertarians. There is something really off about them.
    , @Pericles

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem

     

    We could Stand on Zanzibar! (Well, nowadays we would need something larger.)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar
    , @AndrewR
    Utter lunacy. Where would the food be grown? And who would be ok with cutting down all the forests in CA? Riley is truly demonic.
    , @AnotherDad

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :
     
    The black Irish, never the brightest bunch.
    , @MarkinLA
    Well at least he associated Reagan (and the Bushes) with immigration stupidity. The funny thing is he tried to make it sound like stupidity is OK as long as Reagan believed in it.
  4. Wasn’t Obama a big fan of “The Sports Gene?” Now is he bad too?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I told Saini last year she should interview Obama: he could help her get up to speed on sports.
  5. Angela Saini isn’t all that bright

    I noticed that too.

    • Replies: @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.
    , @Kyle
    She’s not very bright but she’s good at monkey see monkey do. And she’s the monkey.
    , @bored identity
    Saini got bored identity at "lazy biological essentialism".


    As Uncle Tucker would say :

    "What does that even mean?"
  6. Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.

    Because no scientific hypothesis ever needs to be re-assessed with the passage of time. And the further the critique recedes into history, the more untouchable it becomes. That’s how real science works! It’s not like there have been any advances in genetics, for example, since 1981.

    • LOL: Kyle, AndrewR
    • Replies: @guest
    "You might think" some polemical book would settle a scientific issue hereafter and for all time, if you're an idiot.
    , @Unladen Swallow
    I pretty sure most or all of the book was garbage even in 1981, Vincent Sarich pointed out that Gould never once mentioned the tripling of hominid brain size that occurred over the last few million years. This would tend to suggest that bigger brains maybe had, you know, adaptive value. Arthur Jensen pointed out that almost every paraphrase of Jensen's position in his book is false, misleading, a caricature or slanted to serve Gould's purpose.

    However you are right about the left protecting their heroes, when some biological anthropologists pointed Franz Boas work on head size of children was incorrect, they were furiously denounced and it has been asserted that it is just as justified and without flaws as ever by no less an authority than Jonathan Marks.

    , @Ben Tillman
    It’s also not like Gould’s book did what she claims it did. It was all lies that proved nothing.
  7. Speaking of science:

    “Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry “
    “After a photo of these dolls surfaced on social media and an Assemblywoman outcried, er, complained, the Bayonne dollar store took them off the shelves.”
    “A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to “slam” and “whack” them against a wall “to feel better.””

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

  8. Speaking of science:

    “Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry “
    “A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to “slam” and “whack” them against a wall “to feel better.””

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Even white dolls such as this would not be appropriate to be sold, she [Assemblywoman McKnight] said.

    "To have a product depict or teach children that it is OK to hit another child, regardless of race, in order to feel good is sick," she added.
     

    Credit where credit is due.

    But you're right. The article doesn't say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.

    , @Hypnotoad666
    It's not the dolls' fault. This feels like blaming the victim.

    Couldn't they just change the instructions. If you put pins in them to hex your enemies that could be considered culturally vibrant.
    , @Triumph104

    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.
     
    , @Reg Cæsar
    These are voodoo dolls. Thus, this qualifies as cultural appropriation.

    Tell Apu they don't belong in his dollar store.

    And tell the folks in Shenzen to stop shipping them here.
  9. Why did they hire someone who is hawking a book to review a competing book? Of course it would end up “Buy mine, not his.”

    The Harpending reference was simply a dog whistle to show he was a Nazi, “Western Civilization,” get it?

  10. In Skin Deep, the writer and media lecturer dissects the dubious pseudoscientific arguments still used to justify racism. In my latest book, Superior, I cover similar ground (see R. Nelson Nature 570, 440–441; 2019). Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981

    I’m trying to parse this.


    the writer and media lecturer dissects the dubious pseudoscientific arguments still used to justify racism.

    Angela Saini: He dissects it, but there is not need to! It’s dubious! And pseudoscientific. And the arguments are used to justify racism. We know all this in advance, because I say so in advance!

    In my latest book, Superior

    AS: Never mind that Gavin Evans. Let’s talk about my book! I, me, me, mine. Angela Saini.

    (see R. Nelson Nature 570, 440–441; 2019)

    AS: My work is much more prestigious than Gavin Evans’. That’s because there’s a reference to it in the prestigious science periodical, Nature.

    Look! See the page number citation that I’ve helpfully given you? That’s how important scientific work is cited. My work is important scientific work.

    Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique …

    AS: Stephen Jay Gould and me. He was a very important scientist. That’s why his name comes up so soon after my book is mentioned.

  11. Don’t forget that one of the greatest sumo wrestlers of all time was a Hawaiian: Akebono.

    At 6′-8″ and 551 pounds he was formidable in his prime.

    • Replies: @John Gritt
    Chadwick Haheo Rowan aka Akebono Tarō was a giant.

    Aren't native Hawai'ians really Maori who sailed off course? 😉

    Aren't contemporary Hawai'ians a mulatto, a mixed race people of Anglo-Saxons, native Hawai'ians and Jappos?

  12. Inability to distinguish within-group and between-group variation. AKA “We need to write a sit-com with Africans who have great hobbies!”

  13. Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: “more variation within groups than between groups”. Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    • Replies: @guest
    You should look up the Lewontin Fallacy. It's about genetic differences. Supposedly most of the genetic variation occurs between individuals of the same race, and that variations you could use to distinguish one race from another are very small in comparison.
    , @Anonymous
    You must be new to basics :-)
    Since no one bothered to reply, here is a link that, at the very least, will give you all the key words to google and learn more: https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/variation-within-and-between-races/
    , @International Jew
    Yeah, either the standard deviations or, if they want to go full straw man, the ranges.

    Fun fact: right now it's 78° in Miami and 66° in Boston. Now the range of temperatures over a year in Boston is close to 100°. This proves that, just as race does not exist, neither does climate. (Kudos to iSteve commenter bgates for teaching me that.)

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    The average height difference between men and women is what, 5 or 6 inches? Yet there are men only four feet tall and others seven feet tall.

    Therefore "men are taller than women" is sexist pseudoscience.
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    I also like Z Man's version: The best team in baseball has a batting average of .286 while the worst team has an average of .230. But the differences between players within the best team's roster are massively larger, running from .333 to .102.

    Therefore, it is ableist pseudoscience to think that the best team in baseball is "better at hitting" than the worst team.

    , @AndrewR
    In January in Chicago the temperature ranges from -25°F to 65°F. The mean temperature in January is 25°F and the mean temperature in July is 70°F. Since intra-month variation is greater than inter-month variation, seasons don't exist, racist.

    That's literally how these people think.
    , @SaneClownPosse
    Thank you for posting the question. The replies are excellent.

    Pseudo science using words strung together to obfuscate a lack of logic and evidence.
  14. Henry Harpending’s piece about his bungled effort to shoot an African Cape buffalo (the world’s most dangerous game animal) is immensely amusing.

    • Replies: @petit bourgeois
    I just watched "Battle at Kruger", inspired by your post about "Black Death."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM
  15. Can’t wait to see her explain that cultural factors are holding Pygmies back in Track and Field…….

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    Can’t wait to see her explain that cultural factors are holding Pygmies back in Track and Field…….
     
    I am not sure of the rules, but would they be allowed to run under the hurdles?
    , @Duke84
    We already know what's holding them back - white racism.
  16. Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.

    Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in “debunking” Morton’s “racist” skull measurement study? Or that cranial capacity is now irrefutably linked to intelligence, and highly correlated to race?

    Or does she not care? I guess “moral facts” always trump actual facts if you’re an SJW.

    • Replies: @megabar
    > Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in “debunking” Morton’s “racist” skull measurement study?

    Even more, Gould's book says little of importance, even if every fact in his book were true. IIRC, the book tried to establish the following:

    * Some intelligence researchers are/were biased, and sought to confirm their own belief that Europeans are the smartest race
    * Some early measurements of brain case size and other elements of physiognomy may have been incorrect and/or fudged
    * Early intelligence testing was flawed, and unfair to people with less cultural immersion as compared to NW European Americans.
    * Some conceptions of intelligence are wrong. For example, the idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the "engine" of intelligence is flawed, and falls in the face of certain statistical analyses.

    At best, this would cause you to ignore or look more critically at some lines of evidence. It does not come close to "debunking" the racial line of reasoning.

  17. @syonredux
    Can't wait to see her explain that cultural factors are holding Pygmies back in Track and Field.......

    Can’t wait to see her explain that cultural factors are holding Pygmies back in Track and Field…….

    I am not sure of the rules, but would they be allowed to run under the hurdles?

    • LOL: Kylie, jim jones
  18. Jon Entine covered this ground in his book Taboo in 2000. Why is this news?

  19. Angela Saini isn’t all that bright, but she’s a very feminine lady, so she knows about as much about sports as I know about soap operas.

    I wonder if Oxford would have admitted her as an English concentrator?

  20. This woman demonstrates her IYI status with every word she writes. No one could be this intentionally obtuse

  21. I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.” I tried to think of a more appropriate name for it, but the best I could come up with is “Social Construction.” I welcome other suggestion from the witty readers of this blog….

    • Replies: @El Dato
    "university prose" outlet.

    You could have this big heading: "OUTLET" ("Nature is now OUTLET; bringing you the best in saince")

    "You know, my last paper appeared in OUTLET"
    "What was it about?"
    "Debunking heteronormative reverse-pansesxual tri-racial stereotypes in transgender bathroom encounters using Deep Learning"
    "Oh!"

    From dat room-temperature article:


    True complexity

    On intelligence, Evans dissects the work of twins researcher Robert Plomin, who has made the claim that IQ is highly heritable (see N. Comfort Nature 561, 461–463; 2018). Some have interpreted that as implying that there are genetic differences between population groups. But IQ is malleable. As Evans points out, “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”. Adoption into well-off families is associated with IQ gains of as much as 12–18 points. Research has shown that IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.

     

    How is "IQ is highly heritable" opposed to “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”.

    It isn't.


    IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.
     
    Yes. But so what. Well, "it's complex".
    , @bomag
    Instead of Nature, call it Narrative.

    Has the feature of shared lettering.
    , @AnotherDad

    I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.”
     
    Yeah, when did "Nature" become an anti-science leftist rag?

    A thing that constantly strikes is how mathematically silly various aspects of minoritarian ideology are.

    "Nation of immigrants"--i.e. immigration forever. Applying sixth grade math, either:
    -- population increases and increases until you are crowded, shithole no one wants to come to or
    -- the native populations genes are increasing replaced by incoming foreigners.
    (Note: i'm aware there are some other mathematically sound scenarios but the only one that's at all palatable for natives is "Carribbean sugar planation"--you keep bringing immigrants in and work them to death. How wonderful! And obvious that's not what these folks are talking about.)

    So just trivial math reveals "nation of immigrants" means either shitholecide or genocide.


    This whole "race doesn't exist", "all groups are the same under the skin" ideology is bizarre.

    We know race exists because we can see it. If we didn't we wouldn't be arguing about it. So what this argument is really about is all the non-apparent differences. Basically about differences in mental traits.

    Trivial math: if a trait varies between individuals--is not fixed in humans--then it varies between separate "population groups".

    Take two races A + B and lets assume Saini is right and they have exactly the same distribution of various genes that produce variance in some trait--intelligence, conscientiousness, cooperative, extraversion, whatever. Now someone in group A dies.... now the races are different. Yes, trivially so, but different. How those differences will change over time--be trivial or substantial, i can't say. It depends, of course, on selection. But if there are individual differences, then you'll have group differences--math.

    Now the idea that selection, operating all these widely varying environments--geographically, climatically, agriculturally, civilizationally, technologically--produces exactly the same distribution of genetic traits for precisely our most salient, evolved survival adaptation--our big brained mental processing--is just ... nuts! It contradicts ever principal of evoluntionary biology. Our evolved big brains are mankind's survival bread and butter, precisely where you'd expect the most vigorous selection adapting to new/different environments.
  22. “Kenyan athletes”

    Nation states, like Kenya, are an artificial constructs. Maybe a small subgroup of persons, who mostly live in Kenya, are marathon adapted but not Kenyan Nationals as a whole.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    They compete in the Olympics representing Kenya, which makes them easy to count that way. I'm all in favor of more precise breakdowns, but, on the other hand, you can go to Wikipedia and check my arithmetic about Kenyan Olympic medalists very easily:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_at_the_Olympics#Medals_by_sport

    , @guest
    Dude, Kenyan citizenship status automatically stirs up your blood in correct order to accomplish feats of running.

    Also, you get a bit of British residue, which lends you a wry sense of humor.
    , @bomag
    This falls under the category of "everyone knows what he's talking about."
    , @Jack D
    That's correct. The marathoners are all from a specific ethno-linguistic group (the "Kalenjin") of Nilotic people who live in only 1 part of Kenya.

    The racist Wikipedia has this to say about Nilotic people (since race doesn't really exist, this is just racist babbling and has no foundation in fact - Nilotic people are in reality indistinguishable from other non-existent "races" such as East Asians and are no more likely to be tall, skinny or dark than the average Vietnamese, for example):


    Physically, Nilotes are noted for their typically very dark skin color and slender, tall bodies. They often possess exceptionally long limbs, particularly vis-a-vis the distal segments (forearms, calves). This characteristic is thought to be a climatic adaptation to allow their bodies to shed heat more efficiently.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilotic_peoples

    Anyone who notices that Nilotes tend to be tall, slender and dark skinned is just a racist.

    Most American slaves were West African Bantus and not Nilotes so we don't see their body type that much in American blacks.

  23. @Hypnotoad666

    Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.
     
    Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in "debunking" Morton's "racist" skull measurement study? Or that cranial capacity is now irrefutably linked to intelligence, and highly correlated to race?

    Or does she not care? I guess "moral facts" always trump actual facts if you're an SJW.

    > Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in “debunking” Morton’s “racist” skull measurement study?

    Even more, Gould’s book says little of importance, even if every fact in his book were true. IIRC, the book tried to establish the following:

    * Some intelligence researchers are/were biased, and sought to confirm their own belief that Europeans are the smartest race
    * Some early measurements of brain case size and other elements of physiognomy may have been incorrect and/or fudged
    * Early intelligence testing was flawed, and unfair to people with less cultural immersion as compared to NW European Americans.
    * Some conceptions of intelligence are wrong. For example, the idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the “engine” of intelligence is flawed, and falls in the face of certain statistical analyses.

    At best, this would cause you to ignore or look more critically at some lines of evidence. It does not come close to “debunking” the racial line of reasoning.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of "reification" . According to Gould, proponents of IQ believed that IQ was a "thing" and not just a rating scale. The pressure in your circulatory system is a "thing" and you can measure it fairly directly. But IQ is not one single thing, therefore it does not exist at all, according to Gould.

    This is profoundly wrong. Let's take reading for example. You can test people on reading and conclude that individual X reads at the 2nd grade level or at the 5th percentile of his age group. There are numerous tests for this and they would all more or less agree as to X's grade level or percentile. However, these tests are all indirect - there is no reading gauge that you can wrap around someone's arm and determine reading ability as a number on a dial.

    The ability to read and write is not a "thing" or one thing. It is actually a combination of a whole bunch of different skills - ability to recognize shapes, to attach sounds to shapes, to combine sounds into words, to connect words into sentences, to gain meaning from a sentence, the motor control needed to form the letters on paper, etc. A deficiency in any one of these things would reduce your ability to read and write. Nevertheless, it's perfectly valid and scientific to say "X reads at the 2nd grade level." You can show X a newspaper or a novel or a comic book and if his reading score is low he's going to have difficulty reading any one of them.

    IQ is the exact same thing - it measures our ability to comprehend and process concepts in any field. It was invented when scientists noted that the same kids who did well in one subject in school tended to do well in ALL subjects and decided that there should be a way to figure out who these kids were and sum it all up in one number (or a few numbers). Again it works with great consistency - you can give someone the Wechsler test and then the Stanford-Binet test and they will usually agree to within a few points. You can give the same person these tests over a period of years and the numbers will remain fairly constant.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the “engine” of intelligence is flawed

     

    Yes, that engine is called "the brain".
  24. While 100m dash Olympians tend to be extremely muscular, the Kenyans who do well in track tend to be extremely slender.

    Long distance runners (endurance athletes) train by running long distances (burning lots of calories). Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass (carbo-loading helps to top-off the fuel tank, immediately before a race).

    Sprinters win with explosive (muscle) power. They do weight training, vertical jumping (plyometrics) etc. to supplement the intrinsic, power building nature of their sport. They like to eat foods rich in protein.

    • Replies: @megabar
    > Long distance runners ... can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That's easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters ... eat foods rich in protein.

    I'm not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you're arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.
    , @MarkinLA
    Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass


    Every sporting event has it's own optimal body type with very little variation around that desired mean at the top. Look at distance runners low weight and wiry. You cannot carry a lot of weight for long distances and win. It isn't about eating enough it is about carrying useless weight mile after mile. Look at cycling. Does anybody see anybody looking like an NFL linebacker? Those powerful leg muscles might make a difference in a 200 meter bike sprint but be dead weight in a 120 mile leg of the Tour de France.
  25. How One Kenyan Tribe Produces The World’s Best Runners
    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2013/11/01/241895965/how-one-kenyan-tribe-produces-the-worlds-best-runners

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalenjin_people#Demographics

    Kalenjin speakers number 4,967,328 individuals. Kalenjin speaker seems like an artificial construct too.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    My impression is that Kenya's Olympians tend to be something like 3rd cousins of other Olympians. But it's all quite confusing because their runners often will adopt names to compete under that are tributes to older Kenyan star runners: Kipketer Kipchoge Keino.
    , @Bruno
    I heard about Kalenjine tribes (there are many). It’s amazing to see that 10% of Kenyan get 70% of their medals or 50% or worldwide medals.

    Kenyan without Kalenjine are 1 in 160 people worldwide .
    They get 1 in 4 medals for >1500m. The same as rest of the world, Kalenjine excepted.
    That’s 160 times better than rest of non Kenyan humans.

    Kalenjine represent 1 in 1600 people worldwide.
    They get 1 in 2 in the same categories.
    That’s 3200 better than rest of non Kenyan humans.

    Quite dramatic domination ...
  26. @George
    "Kenyan athletes"

    Nation states, like Kenya, are an artificial constructs. Maybe a small subgroup of persons, who mostly live in Kenya, are marathon adapted but not Kenyan Nationals as a whole.

    They compete in the Olympics representing Kenya, which makes them easy to count that way. I’m all in favor of more precise breakdowns, but, on the other hand, you can go to Wikipedia and check my arithmetic about Kenyan Olympic medalists very easily:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_at_the_Olympics#Medals_by_sport

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    True. To be more precise, though, it's not Kenyans - it's some subset of East Africans. Next to Kenyans in winning Olympic long runs and Prestige Marathons are folks from Ethiopia, Djibouti, Sudan, Uganda and Somali. Never Congolese or Nigerians. Applies to their women, too - albeit to a lesser extent.
  27. Mr. Sailer,

    Are those figures for Kenyan men & women combined or men only?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Are those figures for Kenyan men & women combined or men only?
     
    The only man-and-woman-combined that comes to mind is Caster Semenya. That's too small a sample size. And not Kenyan.
  28. @Joe, Averaged
    Wasn’t Obama a big fan of “The Sports Gene?” Now is he bad too?

    I told Saini last year she should interview Obama: he could help her get up to speed on sports.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    I told Saini last year she should interview Obama: he could help her get up to speed on sports.

     

    I hereby challenge Angela Saini and Barack Obama to a home run hitting contest at Fenway Park or Yankee Stadium or Wrigley Field.

    Wooden bats, MLB baseballs and a pitcher of your choice and Ed Dutton as the announcer dressed as Babe Ruth in a woolen uniform. The English like wool. New Englanders, judging from all the rock walls in the woods, like wool too.
  29. Well she’s respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it

    Face it you guys lost

    Race doesn’t exist

    • Troll: Unladen Swallow
    • Replies: @fish
    Ohs Tinys......


    you be rite....she sho bein respekted by teh piers
    , @MarkU

    Well she’s respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it
     
    The piers that be?


    Race doesn’t exist
     
    If race doesn't exist then obviously racism can't exist either.
    , @TWS
    Well in your case it's certainly inconsistent as your sex.
  30. @George
    How One Kenyan Tribe Produces The World's Best Runners
    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2013/11/01/241895965/how-one-kenyan-tribe-produces-the-worlds-best-runners

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalenjin_people#Demographics

    Kalenjin speakers number 4,967,328 individuals. Kalenjin speaker seems like an artificial construct too.

    My impression is that Kenya’s Olympians tend to be something like 3rd cousins of other Olympians. But it’s all quite confusing because their runners often will adopt names to compete under that are tributes to older Kenyan star runners: Kipketer Kipchoge Keino.

    • Replies: @George
    A problem I see with your reasoning is that you are not talking about a race, you are talking about a familial group that is adapted to a certain sport. That familial group also manages to keep their numbers at least stable generation after generation.

    I think sports is well suited to familial dynasties, except it doesn't seem to happen much. But sports careers start and end much younger so there is more time to identify winners and have children.

    The Bernoulli family dynasty of geniuses went on for a while 1654-1935. But they don't seem to exist anymore. One of the last wikipedia entries is Elisabeth Bernoulli (1873-1935), suffragette and campaigner against alcoholism, which might explain some of the reason the Bernoullis are no longer. Fun fact: Fermat's Theorem slayer Andrew Wiles has 3 daughters, so maybe there will be a British math dynasty.

    There may be no easy way to maintain top tier intellectual dynasties, which means it would be hard to create a high IQ race.
  31. … The politics of our age demand that we counteract ‘scientific’ racism not only with rigour, depth and empathy, but also without fear.

    What a bizarre statement.

    The politics of our age demand (How precisely is this “demand” enforced? The Police? Twitter mobs? the human resources department at work?) that we counteract ‘scientific’ racism (just put it in quotes and it’s magically no longer science) not only with rigor, depth and empathy (Empathy for whom exactly?), but also without fear (Fear of who? The guy getting chased by the mob with pitchforks and torches? Fear of the guy in the U.K. getting hauled into police custody for talking about this stuff on the internet?)

    • Replies: @Jack D
    These people like to see themselves as brave and courageous fighters against the Man. They lack the self-awareness to realize that they ARE the Man now and they are the ones doing the bullying.
  32. NPR covers racial bias in police shootings. Lacks a certain perspective.

    New Study Says White Police Officers Are Not More Likely To Shoot Minority Suspects

    https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731839/new-study-says-white-police-officers-are-not-more-likely-to-shoot-minority-suspe

    She thinks people should be more open to the idea that bias and demographics can both play a role. And that’s something that the authors of the paper and their critics both seem to agree on.

    The real question here is not whether race is a factor in police shootings, but when? Is it beforehand in all the things that might lead up to a shooting, such as drug laws or racial profiling? Or does it come down to the skin color of the individual cop holding the gun?

  33. Hobbies; as per National Park Service ads, African-Americans LOVE camping, hiking and the great outdoors.

  34. @Flemur
    Speaking of science:

    "Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry "
    "A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to "slam" and "whack" them against a wall "to feel better.""

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

    Even white dolls such as this would not be appropriate to be sold, she [Assemblywoman McKnight] said.

    “To have a product depict or teach children that it is OK to hit another child, regardless of race, in order to feel good is sick,” she added.

    Credit where credit is due.

    But you’re right. The article doesn’t say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.

    • Replies: @Triumph104
    But you’re right. The article doesn’t say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.


    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.
     
  35. “Skin Deep” indeed. I’m fed up with all these charlatans insisting Kenyan skin gives Kenyans an advantage in long-distance running.

  36. @Abolish_public_education

    While 100m dash Olympians tend to be extremely muscular, the Kenyans who do well in track tend to be extremely slender.
     
    Long distance runners (endurance athletes) train by running long distances (burning lots of calories). Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass (carbo-loading helps to top-off the fuel tank, immediately before a race).

    Sprinters win with explosive (muscle) power. They do weight training, vertical jumping (plyometrics) etc. to supplement the intrinsic, power building nature of their sport. They like to eat foods rich in protein.

    > Long distance runners … can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That’s easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters … eat foods rich in protein.

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you’re arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.
     
    For what it's worth, another strongman, Robert Oberest, is not impressed by Baboumian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGenwfzJJyA
    , @petit bourgeois
    Hitler was a vegetarian and anti-vivisectionist. How can we stop these devils from ruining our diet?
    , @Abolish_public_education
    All the competitive, long distance runners I’ve ever known were slender (Gumby!).

    I do not question that champion athletes are often born with advantages, i.e. genetics.

    A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    The blogger seems to be under the impression that champion, 10,000+ meter runners ought to present diverse body types. As though they were PGA touring pros.
    , @Clyde

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.
     
    I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this. But you can eat a 50/50 mix of pea protein powder and rice protein powder and get about as dense as vegan protein gets. This is 85% protein and it hits all the amino acids. The way I eat is to mix the two powders in a bowl and stir in enough water or apple juice to make a porridge. Let hydrate for 5-10 minutes then eat. A tiny bit of salt or soy sauce adds to the flavor.
    Good grass fed whey- from Wisconsin https://www.amazon.com/Grass-Fed-Whey-Protein-Undenatured/dp/B07CN5GM5N/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Grass%2BFed%2BWhey%2BProtein&qid=1564218011&s=hpc&sr=1-4&th=1
  37. @Patrick in SC

    Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.
     
    Because no scientific hypothesis ever needs to be re-assessed with the passage of time. And the further the critique recedes into history, the more untouchable it becomes. That's how real science works! It's not like there have been any advances in genetics, for example, since 1981.

    “You might think” some polemical book would settle a scientific issue hereafter and for all time, if you’re an idiot.

  38. • Replies: @Gabe Ruth
    Hats off sir, thank you.
  39. Anon[294] • Disclaimer says:

    Arguing with racists on points of fact is a game with no winners. Debating with them on their own terms, as Evans does, serves only as grist to their mill.

    Why did she write her own book, then, if deplatforming is the correct response?

    Racist ‘science’ must be seen for what it is: a way of rationalizing long-standing prejudices, to prop up a particular vision of society as racists would like it to be. It is about power. This is why, historically, work claiming to show deep racial differences has been of dismal quality. Racists don’t care if their data are weak and theories shoddy. They need only the thinnest veneer of scientific respectability to convince the unwitting.

    Dismal quality research, weak data, shoddy theories? This seems like exactly the sort of situation where “arguing on points of fact” would work.

    For instance, the review and the book reviewed mention Robert Plomin, a twins and adoption expert, then goes on to say, “As Evans points out, “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”. Adoption into well-off families is associated with IQ gains of as much as 12–18 points.”

    Oh, well, that solves it.

    And yet I have this nagging question: What does Plomin say about this line of research? He’s hawking his own book. He’s easy to get in contact with. He’s appeared on tiny podcasts, and has been very generous with his time. Give him a call. If he hangs up on you, put that in your book.

    By the way, a more honest discusstion of this popped up in the discussion around the Turkheimer, et al., piece in Vox a couple of years ago:

    Are there significant limitations to studies on the effect of adoption on IQ? In our original post, we pointed out that adoption from a poor home to a well-off home is associated with a 12- to 18-point gain in IQ. This point was challenged from several angles.

    First, even when adoption produces substantial gains in the average IQs of adopted children, the magnitudes of the individual gains are better predicted by the IQs of the children’s biological parents than by the relative quality of the adoptive environment. This is true but irrelevant: It is merely evidence that IQ is partly heritable, which no one disputes. That effect (one more time) has no implications for understanding group differences. (The authoritative reference on this phenomenon, by the way, is Turkheimer, 1991.)

    What we care about is how high their IQs are, not whether the correlation between their IQs and their biological parents is higher or lower than the correlation with the IQs of the adoptive parents. The IQs of those adopted children are substantially higher than they would have been if they had been raised by their biological parents.

    Second, a previous study co-authored by Turkheimer found an adoption effect of only about 4.4 points. However, the magnitude of the increase afforded by adoption depends on the difference between the biological and adoptive homes. This particular adoption study was conducted in Sweden, using children adopted from homes of slightly less than average economic status into homes that were slightly higher than average. Krona for krona, the IQ gains were just about the same. Again, adoption into improved environments, even in a country with a strong social safety net and relatively slight economic differences between the social classes, increases IQ.

    https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/6/15/15797120/race-black-white-iq-response-critics

    This was Richard Nisbett, I believe, in the three-author Vox II piece. He was responding to Noam Stein:

    3. The cited adoption studies overstate the positive influence of an upper middle class environment

    Murray’s assertion that it is hard to raise the IQs of disadvantaged children leaves out the most important data point. Adoption from a poor family into a better-off one is associated with IQ gains of 12 to 18 points.

    Here the authors seem to be citing a meta-study of adopted and non-adopted siblings: in particular referencing the six studies with a total of 253 subjects where such a difference was analyzed. For example, there is one of French half-siblings, one raised in a working class environment and the other in an upper-middle class environment. They have significant limitations, as discussed in James J. Lee’s review of Vox author Richard E. Nisbett’s book on intelligence:

    [Long book extract]

    Even ignoring these confounds, as we have seen above the positive (and negative) effects of environment fade well into young adulthood, so IQ gains at 14 should not be taken for granted. Studies with larger samples and tested at later ages show much smaller effects, such as this one from Turkheimer himself on adopted Swedish children, or this study showing about a 7 IQ point boost going from low SES to a high SES environment.

    Interestingly, like the Flynn effect — and unlike racial group differences in IQ — adoptees show gains in IQ on the subtests least associated with the g factor”:

    https://medium.com/@houstoneuler/the-cherry-picked-science-in-voxs-charles-murray-article-bd534a9c4476

    So, there is a legitimate debate here among specialists “arguing on points of fact.”

    • Replies: @bomag

    Dismal quality research, weak data, shoddy theories
     
    Not a good line of argument when better research, better data, and better theories keep reaching the same conclusions.
  40. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California

    The commuter time would become *terrible*. And the beach – there would have to be waiting lists. And the littering, the littering, man!

    Somebody should finally make a movie out of Stand on Zanzibar.

  41. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    You should look up the Lewontin Fallacy. It’s about genetic differences. Supposedly most of the genetic variation occurs between individuals of the same race, and that variations you could use to distinguish one race from another are very small in comparison.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    It's unlikely he would ask that question if he weren't already familiar with "Lewontin's Fallacy". "Lewontin's Fallacy" is literally unintelligible. It's up to the reader to try to give it some meaning.

    This reader says there's no reason to help Lewontin out with a charitable interpretation of his nonsense.

  42. Hey Steve – a while ago you asked about a way to embed spreadsheets into a web page – have you looked into Tableau (tableau.com)? It’s $70 / month (looking at it, it looks as though you can maybe use it for free as long as you’re using public data, but I haven’t investigated it). Overall it’s really pretty user-friendly – a bunch of data science students in a MOOC used it (including me), you don’t have to be an expert. Here’s an example of embedding it into a web page :

    https://gfintegrity.org/report/the-library-card-project/

    And a gallery: https://public.tableau.com/s/gallery/?tab=viz-of-the-day&type=viz-of-the-day

    I believe that it’s a desktop app that lets you publish to the web. It’s about the best tool for data visualization going, aside from being an expert and rolling your own.

  43. @George
    "Kenyan athletes"

    Nation states, like Kenya, are an artificial constructs. Maybe a small subgroup of persons, who mostly live in Kenya, are marathon adapted but not Kenyan Nationals as a whole.

    Dude, Kenyan citizenship status automatically stirs up your blood in correct order to accomplish feats of running.

    Also, you get a bit of British residue, which lends you a wry sense of humor.

  44. @Interested Bystander
    I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.” I tried to think of a more appropriate name for it, but the best I could come up with is “Social Construction.” I welcome other suggestion from the witty readers of this blog....

    “university prose” outlet.

    You could have this big heading: “OUTLET” (“Nature is now OUTLET; bringing you the best in saince”)

    “You know, my last paper appeared in OUTLET”
    “What was it about?”
    “Debunking heteronormative reverse-pansesxual tri-racial stereotypes in transgender bathroom encounters using Deep Learning”
    “Oh!”

    From dat room-temperature article:

    True complexity

    On intelligence, Evans dissects the work of twins researcher Robert Plomin, who has made the claim that IQ is highly heritable (see N. Comfort Nature 561, 461–463; 2018). Some have interpreted that as implying that there are genetic differences between population groups. But IQ is malleable. As Evans points out, “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”. Adoption into well-off families is associated with IQ gains of as much as 12–18 points. Research has shown that IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.

    How is “IQ is highly heritable” opposed to “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”.

    It isn’t.

    IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.

    Yes. But so what. Well, “it’s complex”.

    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
    I don't know what study she is referring to by this Evans person. But she is likely talking about some version of Twin A being adopted into an affluent white Western family while Twin B is left to languish in a festering Nigerian slum. In that case, you can see IQ increases on the order of 12+ points. If this is the case and she wasn't an anti-scientific liar, she would emphasize that the difference is caused by removing the child from an extremely deprived and pernicious environment.

    If she is talking about something else, I'm betting the real difference lies in the researcher's willingness to use bad methodology or outright fraud.

  45. That’s my recollection of Gould as well. Saini is really following in his footsteps as a hack who sells books by loudly shouting politically correct conclusions without proof. She’s just lots dumber and, as befitting the current year, is more over the top in her invective than Gould was.

    I just read her review and — blecht! It’s absolutely awful on every level, including simply as a book review. She shamelessly plugs her own book and then launches into a generic anti-racism rant. She doesn’t seem the least bit interested in Evans book and it’s unclear whether she has actually read it.

    It’s probably not surprising that she sees his book primarily as competition for her own. All SJW hack authors from Gould to the present are simply recycling the same interchangeable hack arguments:

    (a) Racism is super plus ultra bad therefore findings of racial differences must be wrong. They just have to be!

    (b) Person X’s scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he once said something heretical.

    (c) Person’s Y’s scientific findings of racial differences must also be dismissed because he said something good about person X (who is bad).

    (d) Person Z’s scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he failed to condemn person X or person Y.

    (e) Any scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because they couldn’t prove that an unknown and unidentifiable environmental factor wasn’t actually causing the observed difference.

    (f) “Intelligence isn’t real anyway;” everyone is smart and special in their own unique way!

    (g) “Hey look, a squirrel!”

    People like Saini really don’t deserve to be called “science writers” at all. Maybe “science-adjacent” writers or “science-skeptics,” or something.

    • Replies: @newrouter
    >People like Saini really don’t deserve to be called “science writers” at all. Maybe “science-adjacent” writers or “science-skeptics,” or something.<

    party line pushers?
    , @David
    Science-adjacent is exactly what metaphysics means. Physics is Greek for nature and referred to how a school or person believed the world worked. Metaphysics was how one should judge good and evil and how one should live.
  46. @Flemur
    Speaking of science:

    "Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry "
    "A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to "slam" and "whack" them against a wall "to feel better.""

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

    It’s not the dolls’ fault. This feels like blaming the victim.

    Couldn’t they just change the instructions. If you put pins in them to hex your enemies that could be considered culturally vibrant.

  47. @megabar
    > Long distance runners ... can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That's easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters ... eat foods rich in protein.

    I'm not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you're arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    For what it’s worth, another strongman, Robert Oberest, is not impressed by Baboumian:

    • Replies: @megabar
    > For what it’s worth, another strongman, Robert Oberest, is not impressed by Baboumian:

    Yeah, could be. I don't pretend to know enough about this to vouch for Baboumian as elite or not. I think it's fair to say that he looks pretty strong, and it's also fair to say that I don't really know what he eats.

    I do think that many of things we hold as gospel w.r.t. nutrition are likely wrong. If meat/milk are uniquely anabolic, it might have less to do with protein quantity, per se, than we think. One theory is that methionine is quite anabolic, and it does come in higher amounts in animal protein. One could imagine that milk in particular has other growth factors, given its role in the natural world.

    Of course, neither of those dispute that "main" point, that animal protein might make you bigger and stronger, which I think very well might be true.
  48. Anon[380] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m interested in reading this part of the book:

    Evans goes on to damn US psychologists more generally as giving a “faux-scientific gloss to unscientific assumptions”, particularly that IQ is a rigorous or reliable measure of intelligence.

    Research has shown that IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.

    So:

    1. Blacks only score lower on IQ because of racism. If that is removed, the score the same, as an adoption study shows. In fact, even after adoption black kids are subjected to racism based on their looks. So ultimately, they would be smarter than whites or anyone else but for the racism.

    2. However, even though blacks have a higher potential IQ than everyone else, it turns out that IQ is complete rubbish. It doesn’t measure anything useful. What a bummer for blacks to have such a high potential IQ, and in the end it doesn’t mean anything!

    3. But wait, there is something besides IQ, a metric called “human intellectual complexity and variation.” Let’s call it HICV. HICV is what really matters, and IQ doesn’t capture it. The sources for the HICV concept … uh … like uh … Gardner’s multiple intelligences, EQ, learning styles, Myers-Briggs … uh, get back to me on that.

    4. The point is, HICV is quality stuff, not dismal or shoddy like IQ research.

    5. And here’s the thing: Black HICV is way higher than that of any other race (but race doesn’t exist). It’s not intelligence; it’s intellect, in all of its complexity and variation, and blacks have loads of it. We’re gonna have an HICV test finished and calibrated real soon now, so stay tuned.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    Blacks only score lower on IQ because of racism. If that is removed, the score the same

     

    Blacks in 100% black African nations are even lower IQ than blacks here. Empirically, white racism raises Black IQ.
  49. @Patrick in SC

    Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.
     
    Because no scientific hypothesis ever needs to be re-assessed with the passage of time. And the further the critique recedes into history, the more untouchable it becomes. That's how real science works! It's not like there have been any advances in genetics, for example, since 1981.

    I pretty sure most or all of the book was garbage even in 1981, Vincent Sarich pointed out that Gould never once mentioned the tripling of hominid brain size that occurred over the last few million years. This would tend to suggest that bigger brains maybe had, you know, adaptive value. Arthur Jensen pointed out that almost every paraphrase of Jensen’s position in his book is false, misleading, a caricature or slanted to serve Gould’s purpose.

    However you are right about the left protecting their heroes, when some biological anthropologists pointed Franz Boas work on head size of children was incorrect, they were furiously denounced and it has been asserted that it is just as justified and without flaws as ever by no less an authority than Jonathan Marks.

  50. @syonredux
    Can't wait to see her explain that cultural factors are holding Pygmies back in Track and Field.......

    We already know what’s holding them back – white racism.

  51. OT:

    1) See this gorillionth article about the Gender Wars

    2) Somehow read the sign on Warren’s podium as “Restrooms Nation”
    3) “You have to log off”.

  52. Henry Harpending [claimed] that evolutionary pressures have led to psychological differences between populations.

    Good heavens – minor environmental pressures can cause significant psychological differences between siblings; it’s indefensible to claim major environmental pressures cannot cause such differences among populations in wildly varying environments (deserts versus tundra; the presence versus absence of megafauna, etc.). Why do you suppose Nordic myths equate hellish places to frozen wastes and Semitic myths depict them as fiery infernos? Why do European stock emphasise monogamy and nuclear families while Africans more commonly reckon it takes a village? No sir, no pressures toward this or that psychological difference there. Why, the very basis of psychology is that varying stimuli will condition for varying behaviour. Assuming any nurturing at all (which necessarily occurs in altricial species like humans (arguably the most altricial of all organisms!), evolutionary (i.e.,environmental) pressures affect (indeed, effect) psychology. Strictly speaking, perhaps these matters are not necessarily biochemically encoded (i.e., genetic) and therefore not properly evolutionary, but even if that position is taken, we are only engaging in a semantic questions about an adverb: Fine, pressures are not evolutionarily leading to psychological differences…but they sure as Hell are leading to psychological differences!

    Is anyone here familiar with any literature supporting any kind of (what I shall call) “Mowgli effect” (I welcome a zoologist who may know the proper term for it, if there is one)? Here is an unscientific and anecdotal report of the kind of thing I am interested in: the case of a husky whose owner claims it was raised by cats and exhibits feline behavior. Obviously this phenomenon, if significant, can only occur when the species are sufficiently similar in physiology and intelligence*, but I would love to know what the empirical data show about the possibility. (Brood parasitism weakens the likelihood this occurs, but most birds are far more precocial than most mammals.)

    *We’ve all raised cats and dogs from weaning, or, with bottles, in the tragic cases of orphans, even earlier, and of course these animals do not grow up to understand algebra, for obvious reasons.

  53. @Flemur
    Speaking of science:

    "Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry "
    "A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to "slam" and "whack" them against a wall "to feel better.""

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.

  54. @Hypnotoad666
    That's my recollection of Gould as well. Saini is really following in his footsteps as a hack who sells books by loudly shouting politically correct conclusions without proof. She's just lots dumber and, as befitting the current year, is more over the top in her invective than Gould was.

    I just read her review and -- blecht! It's absolutely awful on every level, including simply as a book review. She shamelessly plugs her own book and then launches into a generic anti-racism rant. She doesn't seem the least bit interested in Evans book and it's unclear whether she has actually read it.

    It's probably not surprising that she sees his book primarily as competition for her own. All SJW hack authors from Gould to the present are simply recycling the same interchangeable hack arguments:

    (a) Racism is super plus ultra bad therefore findings of racial differences must be wrong. They just have to be!

    (b) Person X's scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he once said something heretical.

    (c) Person's Y's scientific findings of racial differences must also be dismissed because he said something good about person X (who is bad).

    (d) Person Z's scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he failed to condemn person X or person Y.

    (e) Any scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because they couldn't prove that an unknown and unidentifiable environmental factor wasn't actually causing the observed difference.

    (f) "Intelligence isn't real anyway;" everyone is smart and special in their own unique way!

    (g) "Hey look, a squirrel!"

    People like Saini really don't deserve to be called "science writers" at all. Maybe "science-adjacent" writers or "science-skeptics," or something.

    >People like Saini really don’t deserve to be called “science writers” at all. Maybe “science-adjacent” writers or “science-skeptics,” or something.<

    party line pushers?

  55. @PiltdownMan

    Even white dolls such as this would not be appropriate to be sold, she [Assemblywoman McKnight] said.

    "To have a product depict or teach children that it is OK to hit another child, regardless of race, in order to feel good is sick," she added.
     

    Credit where credit is due.

    But you're right. The article doesn't say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.

    But you’re right. The article doesn’t say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.

    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    there were no white dolls on the store shelves.
     
    Because they had sold out?
    , @PiltdownMan
    Thanks. Missed it completely.
  56. @Triumph104
    But you’re right. The article doesn’t say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.


    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.
     

    there were no white dolls on the store shelves.

    Because they had sold out?

    • LOL: PiltdownMan
  57. @Prosa123
    Henry Harpending's piece about his bungled effort to shoot an African Cape buffalo (the world's most dangerous game animal) is immensely amusing.

    I just watched “Battle at Kruger”, inspired by your post about “Black Death.”

  58. …Harpending stated, bizarrely: “I’ve never seen anyone with a hobby in Africa.”

    Throughout subsistent Africa, adults probably don’t have a lot of time for hobbies (among other explanations).

    Suggestion: her 15m are up.

  59. @newrouter
    Mr. Sailer,

    Are those figures for Kenyan men & women combined or men only?

    Are those figures for Kenyan men & women combined or men only?

    The only man-and-woman-combined that comes to mind is Caster Semenya. That’s too small a sample size. And not Kenyan.

    • LOL: LondonBob
    • Replies: @newrouter
    To clarify: Are Kenyan women also good at long distances like Kenyan men?
  60. @Flemur
    Speaking of science:

    "Bayonne Dollar Store Takes Black Dolls Off Shelves After Outcry "
    "A dollar store in Bayonne is under fire for selling black cloth dolls that encourage customers to "slam" and "whack" them against a wall "to feel better.""

    The white ones , with exactly the same instructions, are not mentioned for some mysterious reason.

    These are voodoo dolls. Thus, this qualifies as cultural appropriation.

    Tell Apu they don’t belong in his dollar store.

    And tell the folks in Shenzen to stop shipping them here.

  61. Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism…

    …is about as relevant as Glenn Gould’s.

    Glenn Gould confessed to a reporter that he had indeed had gotten many tickets for running red lights. But he had also stopped at green lights more than once, and never got credit for that.

    Glenn vs Stephen Jay– no contest.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    Gould vs. Pretty much anybody--no contest.

    This performance of the Emperor Concerto in which Gould is not only the soloist but also co-conductor along with Karl Ancerl, is sublime.

    https://youtu.be/H-t-d-qjBbM
  62. This latest issue of Nature is a real piece of work.

    In the same book review section featuring Saini’s shine-up of Gavin Evans, there is also a blurb for This Land Is Our Land: An Immigrant’s Manifesto by Suketu Mehta. End sentence: “With more than one million immigrants a year entering the United States, multiculturalism seems to be surviving the rhetoric of hate.”

    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    • Replies: @eah
    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    EDITORIAL 02 JULY 2019 -- Nature is proud to support Pride in STEM -- This year’s International Day of LGBTQ+ People in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths has our fullest backing.
  63. Is it taboo today to state that, say, The Dutch are the tallest people in the world?

  64. @Triumph104
    But you’re right. The article doesn’t say anything about what happened to white dolls, if any, that they might have had in stock.


    The dolls are made out of black cloth and only black dolls were sold, said her spokeswoman; there were no white dolls on the store shelves.
     

    Thanks. Missed it completely.

  65. Everything worth knowing has been discovered by my daughter. She told me Stephen Jay Gould was an idiot when she was twelve.

  66. @Whiskey
    Saini is part of the new master elite . So deplorable s have to now down.

    Only because you allow it. Heck, not only do you allow it, you actually helped this to occur in a way by denouncing patriots like Pat Buchanan who tried to end the immivasion.

  67. @megabar
    > Long distance runners ... can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That's easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters ... eat foods rich in protein.

    I'm not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you're arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.

    Hitler was a vegetarian and anti-vivisectionist. How can we stop these devils from ruining our diet?

  68. @megabar
    > Long distance runners ... can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That's easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters ... eat foods rich in protein.

    I'm not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you're arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.

    All the competitive, long distance runners I’ve ever known were slender (Gumby!).

    I do not question that champion athletes are often born with advantages, i.e. genetics.

    A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    The blogger seems to be under the impression that champion, 10,000+ meter runners ought to present diverse body types. As though they were PGA touring pros.

    • Replies: @megabar
    > A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    So, 50-75 miles per week. That's 5,000-7,500 extra calories per week, or 1,000 extra per day. Michael Phelps famously ate 12,000 calories per day at one point, though that is no doubt atypical, and probably in large part due to the need to generate heat when you're in water all day. But if a normal person of a marathoner's size eats 3,000/day, then a marathoner would only need to eat 4,000/day to avoid catabolism due to caloric inadequacy. The 12,000 Phelps ate simply shows that if the body wants to, it can eat and metabolize a lot of food -- certainly an extra 1,000/day.

    My guess is that the hormonal profile a body generates after endurance exercise is simply not geared for muscle-building, as with power exercises.

    Put another way, if a marathoner were to overeat, they'd likely become skinny-fat, where they have low muscle mass but some excess fat. If a powerlifter overeats, they'll become muscular-fat, where they have big muscles but also excess fat. The difference in how the extra calories are used is whether the body is outputting anabolic or catabolic hormones.

    That jibes with the people I see in real life, though it's possible I'm just operating on confirmation bias, or mistaking cause with effect (i.e. skinny people might be drawn to run, muscular people to lift).
  69. There are those Congolese fellows who spend thousands of dollars on haute couture! Does that count as a hobby?

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

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/fashion-and-style/10564648/Meet-the-dandies-of-Brazzaville.html

  70. Skinny guys who lift and chill get really impressive guns fast. I bet some coach in Kenya is injecting an eleven-year-old like Mike Tyson and training him to lift and sprint.

  71. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Never mind that a billion people could easily be housed in California alone, not even the nation’s largest state by area, and it would still be less crowded than the Bronx. Jason Riley.

    How does one even reason with a moron like this.

    I really loathe libertarians. There is something really off about them.

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Notice he says housed and not fed.
  72. Anonymous[241] • Disclaimer says:
    @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    You must be new to basics 🙂
    Since no one bothered to reply, here is a link that, at the very least, will give you all the key words to google and learn more: https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/variation-within-and-between-races/

  73. But the persistence of everyday racism, the perception of regional cultural differences and the use of racial categories such as ‘Caucasian’ in medicine, employment and official data-gathering blind too many to this fact.

    Or the use of offensive terminology like ‘White privilege’ which attempts to collectively punish and demean individuals solely on the basis of these outdated racial categories.

  74. ok, one more post about her, but that should be it. don’t waste anymore time making posts about this idiot.

  75. Anonymous[241] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    They compete in the Olympics representing Kenya, which makes them easy to count that way. I'm all in favor of more precise breakdowns, but, on the other hand, you can go to Wikipedia and check my arithmetic about Kenyan Olympic medalists very easily:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_at_the_Olympics#Medals_by_sport

    True. To be more precise, though, it’s not Kenyans – it’s some subset of East Africans. Next to Kenyans in winning Olympic long runs and Prestige Marathons are folks from Ethiopia, Djibouti, Sudan, Uganda and Somali. Never Congolese or Nigerians. Applies to their women, too – albeit to a lesser extent.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Kenyans are somewhat competitive at the world level down to 400 m. Ethiopians haven't medaled in anything shorter than 1500 m.
    , @Triumph104
    Exactly. Within these countries most runners come from the same tribe, such as the Kalenjin in Kenya and the Arsi in Ethiopia. The men on Kenya's 2016 Olympic rugby team were the size American football tight ends and defintely not Kalenjin.

    About 75% of Kenya’s best runners come from just 1 of the country’s 40 tribes, the Kalenjin, who comprise approximately 10% of the total Kenyan population. Furthermore, many of Kenya’s best runners come from a subtribe of the Kalenjin known as the Nandi, who comprise only about 3% of the total Kenyan population. ... A similar altitude-based geographical residence is seen among the Ethiopian runners, who come primarily from the Arsi tribal region and secondarily from the Shewa tribal region. Both the Arsis and Shewas have lived for centuries in the highlands of the Great Rift Valley, which extends northward from Kenya into southern and central Ethiopia.

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/517e/9d33f5fee8e519b9225bd47cd4b1de7f905a.pdf
     
  76. Angela Saini. An Indian diaspora woman with a white name, speaking a white language, living in a white country, educated in a white curriculum, working in a white economy. Proud to be Indian, but wants to be accepted as ‘British’. Full of contradictions, so she’s trying to shape the world to make her awkward reality disappear.

  77. Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    "So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica."
     
    Seems reasonable to me. Skin colour is useful for large-scale lumping (black/white/yellow/red) but the Germans are a different race to the Italians - why can't the Luo be a different race to the Bantu? Hell, the Scots aren't the same as the English, although they mostly rub along OK.

    The Kenyans seem able to detect the different tribes just by looking at them, a useful attribute when its massacre time.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/02/kenya1

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_X8nUi3n-gkI/R3wPLCdmSQI/AAAAAAAAALs/oUzEzFTvesw/s400/kenya_ethnic416x313.gif
    , @Pericles

    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

     

    Sometimes I do wonder how black you are.

    (Kidding: I don't.)
    , @Anon

    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.
     

    Black people as a generalized group have the widest genetic variance on the planet, wholly due to the fact that early Homo sapiens women (the race represented by Cro Magnon man) were raped by (indicated by he lack of [female] hominid mtDNA in the human genetic pool) a wide range of still-lurking archaic hominid species as those early unmixed humans explored Africa.

    They were raped by the closest thing to demons that have manifested on this planet: Erectus, Heidelbergensis, Habilis, and Australopithecus. All undoubtedly brutal, relatively low IQ cannibals. What is notably absent is Neanderthal hominid admixture.

    Together the generalized group of humans that are mixed with this admixture, whose source falls within the range of dark skinned archaic hominids, represent the "Black race": the telling physical feature being the human-expressed version of the unique Black skin and wooly black hair of those archaic hominids.

    Within the Black race, there will be geographical differences in hominid-specific admixture depending on the historical location of any one archaic hominid hive. These geographically based admixture differences account for the wide variance within the broader Black race.

    Unmixed humans on the Eurasian continent faced a similar threat from Neanderthal, who was a much more advanced hominid than the archaic hominids from Africa: yet still not fully human.

    Similar to what occurred in Africa, homo sapiens were raped by Neanderthal to produce a new racial strain, which we find has its home in the Armenoid race that finds its modern racial locus in Armenians, Jews, Arabs, and any group that mixes with these groups to any significant degree. Their phenotypic expression, compared to Neanderthal skulls and reconstructions, is an obvious tell. The primary Eastern hominid hives were in Armenia and Israel.

    The same thing occurred in Asia with Western neanderthal species and a hominid known as Denisovan to create the generalized modern East Asian race. Austro-aboriginees are a result of a similar process with their own brand of native archaic hominids.

    This latter group is especially telling to look at, as due to their longtime isolation from unmixed human genetics as well as redder skin the detail of the hominid admixture is especially observable in their phenotypic expression. Its often like looking at an early generation hominid-human mix.

    I have all of the science that proves these conclusions. I've posted it here before, several times. Let me know if you need me to post it again.

    , @guest
    So let me get this straight...white people from Norway and white people from Greece are not interchangeable? Huh-whaaaa?
  78. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    She is an Indian who is outraged–outraged, I say!–that white people sometimes generalize about black people.
    I guess I can see that. When I hear Cubans talking smack about Mexicans,it makes my blood BOIL!!!

  79. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    Yeah, either the standard deviations or, if they want to go full straw man, the ranges.

    Fun fact: right now it’s 78° in Miami and 66° in Boston. Now the range of temperatures over a year in Boston is close to 100°. This proves that, just as race does not exist, neither does climate. (Kudos to iSteve commenter bgates for teaching me that.)

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Oh, thanks for your hint at bgates' argument. Such are the ones that count, especially in public debates: Simple and on the point!
  80. Consider the source: in 1936, Nature dismissed the idea of rocket-propelled space flight as “essentially impracticable”. Then, in 1988, they published Benveniste’s “study” purportedly showing that water retains a “memory” of other molecules put into it, even after it’s diluted beyond any of those molecules remaining. Apollo never, homeopathy forever, got it.
    And now, a thumbs-down for Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending, and other such hateful haters because they’re pre-discredited by…Stephen Jay Gould? Ok, Nature, I think your editors need to apply a little more mental metabolism. To quote the vanity plate on the Runaways’ car: Yeah Right.

    • Replies: @Cowboy shaw
    The way she just swats aside Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending like they're irritating bloggers is quite something. She's not lacking in confidence.
  81. Anonymous[349] • Disclaimer says:

    Yep.

    What about 5 foot basketball players or 300lb horse jockeys?
    It’s all about culture – damn you – and nothing about genotypes.

  82. Angela’s mission is to Sainitize science of any mention of the reality of racial differences.

  83. When did “essentialism” become their new favourite buzzword?

  84. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    Angela Saini is bright (and good looking, hehe) enough to succeed. As long as you play (= suppose/argue) that sloppy, she will dominate your game. Handle this case like Steve Sailer does it – once again in a quite brilliant manner: Don’t underestimate Angela Saini.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    It’s merely an evaluation of category. The best strategy depends on what she actually is/believes. Each one calls for a different set of tactics.
  85. Anonymous[349] • Disclaimer says:

    Anyone who has ever tried to play at a variety of different sports soon comes to the conclusion that real excellence is not a matter of focus, will, practice, coaching etc – which, as it happens *are* exceedingly important – but a matter of who is ‘blessed’ by nature with the ‘right’ physiology for that sport. ‘Physiology’ in this context can mean simple physical build, muscle composition, lung capacitity, hand-eye coordination, heart and circulation efficiency, visual acuity, sheer bodily strength etc etc.
    ‘Blessed by nature’ in this context actually means ‘blessed by genetics’.

  86. I wonder if Saini has heard of Samoan rugby players.

  87. @Anonymous
    True. To be more precise, though, it's not Kenyans - it's some subset of East Africans. Next to Kenyans in winning Olympic long runs and Prestige Marathons are folks from Ethiopia, Djibouti, Sudan, Uganda and Somali. Never Congolese or Nigerians. Applies to their women, too - albeit to a lesser extent.

    The Kenyans are somewhat competitive at the world level down to 400 m. Ethiopians haven’t medaled in anything shorter than 1500 m.

  88. @International Jew
    Yeah, either the standard deviations or, if they want to go full straw man, the ranges.

    Fun fact: right now it's 78° in Miami and 66° in Boston. Now the range of temperatures over a year in Boston is close to 100°. This proves that, just as race does not exist, neither does climate. (Kudos to iSteve commenter bgates for teaching me that.)

    Oh, thanks for your hint at bgates’ argument. Such are the ones that count, especially in public debates: Simple and on the point!

    • Replies: @International Jew
    Steve has another zinger well worth keeping in your quiver: he's said that "race doesn't exist" is like saying "hills don't exist".
  89. Could have been an idea for her new ‘Angela Saini’s Woke Science’ YouTube channel — too bad the UN thought of it first.

  90. @Russ
    This latest issue of Nature is a real piece of work.

    In the same book review section featuring Saini's shine-up of Gavin Evans, there is also a blurb for This Land Is Our Land: An Immigrant's Manifesto by Suketu Mehta. End sentence: "With more than one million immigrants a year entering the United States, multiculturalism seems to be surviving the rhetoric of hate."

    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    EDITORIAL 02 JULY 2019 — Nature is proud to support Pride in STEMThis year’s International Day of LGBTQ+ People in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths has our fullest backing.

    • Replies: @eah
    OT

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa -- it's remarkably banal -- but you do learn a thing or two: Yet most of Africa’s universities lack well-equipped laboratories, libraries and other basic infrastructure, such as a reliable electricity supply or Internet connection -- yes, I guess that's concerning when you're faced with problems such as "Africa’s population is projected to nearly quadruple over the next century" and you expect African universities to help with that and other "challenges".

    I especially noticed it due to the "challenges" western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of "youths" (or "teens" if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.

    A link to a tweet about that, which contains the disturbing video: "Be fearful of White men"@IlhanMN

    A link to the Twitter account of the Wash DC Hilton: @HiltonWash -- where they boast that the annual White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) is held there (presumably with more security) -- their latest tweet has at the moment 2 replies, both more or less trolling the hotel about this recent incident:

    https://twitter.com/lvlonghair1/status/1154780038203527168
    , @Russ
    Ah, yes: "Pride in STEM" day! When I saw that, I read it aloud to my son, whose response was "They're not satisfied with the entire month of June?" No, boy, they're not and never will be.

    Nature publishes a lot of cutting-edge research and thus remains a must-read for me. But my nose must now support a clothespin as well as eyeglasses.
  91. Angela Saini isn’t all that bright, but she’s a very feminine lady, so she knows about as much about sports as I know about soap operas.

    Feminine by looks, yes. But no children or marriage so NO! She’s a sleek, slippery harridan on race mixed with yer garden variety Hindu supremacist, living in The West of course! Female careerist nutcase.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But no children or marriage so NO!

    She has a husband and a child.

  92. NFL positions by race is as telling or more :

    https://medium.com/@fredrikjosefsson/nfl-breakdown-by-race-and-position-279ef8b2e19f

    Défense (black , like Cornerback) versus Offense (white, like Quarterback). It I the same in socket.

    Sport is pure racialism.

  93. Kenyans you say?

    Like this one;
    https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1077833/rutto-becomes-latest-kenyan-runner-to-be-suspended-in-doping-case

    And this one;
    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-athletics-kenya-idUKKCN1S30IP

    Her?
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jan/25/olympic-marathon-champion-jemima-sumgong-doping-ban-doubled-kenya-

    Or him;
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/48617732

    Perhaps this Kenyan
    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-athletics-kenya-idUKKCN1S30IP

    Kenyans are such great runners!
    https://www.runnersworld.com/uk/news/a776475/samuel-kalalei-recieves-doping-ban/

    Seems like one of the racist “trends” all you racist white racist need to stop noticing. You racists. It’s just one or two runners, not a lot….

    https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/kenya-bans-seven-more-athletes-for-doping-1.2447612?mode=amp

    7!? Big deal. Racist.

    Quotes from article; “43 Kenyans have now been suspended for doping with 40 of those in the last three years” and “Dozens of Kenyan athletes stormed the athletics federation headquarters in Nairobi earlier this month, locking out officials and demanding that top Athletics Kenya (AK) bosses step down following allegations of graft and doping cover-ups”

    43 back in 2015. Surely they immediately quit doping straight away.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/kenya-escapes-rio-olympics-ban-doping-iaaf

    “Kenya to escape Rio Olympics ban despite doping concerns, says IAAF”

    “Kenya will not be banned from competing at the Rio Olympics this summer despite serious concerns over the African country’s anti-doping program, the IAAF has revealed.”

    “https://www.ft.com/content/6e86e20a-5ca7-11e6-bb77-a121aa8abd95

    Rio Olympics 2016: Games hit by new Kenyan doping corruption allegations

    Track and field manager filmed allegedly asking for a bribe in return for advice”

    Kenyans.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    In 1992 Europeans, especially home country Spain, were catching up to the East Africans in distance running. Then in 1995 suddenly the East Africans were running astounding times. Most likely is Europeans had Epo in 1992 and East Africans didn't get it until 1995.
  94. @megabar
    > Long distance runners ... can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Of course you can. Running 10 miles requires an extra 1,000 kcal. That's easy. It may be, however, that endurance exercise fundamentally creates a catabolic condition in the body, such that even eating that amount of food will not put on muscle. I know a few marathoners who watch what they eat and still have non-trivial bellies.

    > Sprinters ... eat foods rich in protein.

    I'm not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    Anyways, if you're arguing that world-class proficiency in endurance vs. power is purely a matter of training and diet, I very much disagree. You gotta have the right genetics. At recreational levels, yeah, anyone can likely become reasonably powerful or have reasonable endurance by altering their training.

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.

    I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this. But you can eat a 50/50 mix of pea protein powder and rice protein powder and get about as dense as vegan protein gets. This is 85% protein and it hits all the amino acids. The way I eat is to mix the two powders in a bowl and stir in enough water or apple juice to make a porridge. Let hydrate for 5-10 minutes then eat. A tiny bit of salt or soy sauce adds to the flavor.
    Good grass fed whey- from Wisconsin https://www.amazon.com/Grass-Fed-Whey-Protein-Undenatured/dp/B07CN5GM5N/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Grass%2BFed%2BWhey%2BProtein&qid=1564218011&s=hpc&sr=1-4&th=1

    • Replies: @Faraday's Bobcat
    It certainly sounds delicious!
    , @megabar
    > I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this.

    Yup, could be! My point only is that if this is true, there's likely something beyond just protein adequacy. I can't remember the details, but I recall that even for power lifters, the amount of protein needed to stay in positive nitrogen balance isn't really that high.

    The extra protein, the assimilibility, or the mix of amino acids in animal protein, may be useful in shifting your hormonal profile into being more anabolic. Or perhaps it's something else altogether.
  95. @Puremania
    Consider the source: in 1936, Nature dismissed the idea of rocket-propelled space flight as “essentially impracticable”. Then, in 1988, they published Benveniste’s “study” purportedly showing that water retains a “memory” of other molecules put into it, even after it’s diluted beyond any of those molecules remaining. Apollo never, homeopathy forever, got it.
    And now, a thumbs-down for Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending, and other such hateful haters because they’re pre-discredited by...Stephen Jay Gould? Ok, Nature, I think your editors need to apply a little more mental metabolism. To quote the vanity plate on the Runaways’ car: Yeah Right.

    The way she just swats aside Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending like they’re irritating bloggers is quite something. She’s not lacking in confidence.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    She wishes she did, her "confidence" is that of someone who is delusional, a delusion common in academia and the media. None of her arguments proceed beyond name calling and what Steve calls point and sputter.
    , @Anonymous
    High caste Indians have more chutzpah than Jews.
  96. eah says:
    @eah
    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    EDITORIAL 02 JULY 2019 -- Nature is proud to support Pride in STEM -- This year’s International Day of LGBTQ+ People in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths has our fullest backing.

    OT

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa — it’s remarkably banal — but you do learn a thing or two: Yet most of Africa’s universities lack well-equipped laboratories, libraries and other basic infrastructure, such as a reliable electricity supply or Internet connection — yes, I guess that’s concerning when you’re faced with problems such as “Africa’s population is projected to nearly quadruple over the next century” and you expect African universities to help with that and other “challenges”.

    I especially noticed it due to the “challenges” western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of “youths” (or “teens” if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.

    A link to a tweet about that, which contains the disturbing video: “Be fearful of White men”@IlhanMN

    A link to the Twitter account of the Wash DC Hilton: @HiltonWash — where they boast that the annual White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) is held there (presumably with more security) — their latest tweet has at the moment 2 replies, both more or less trolling the hotel about this recent incident:

    • Replies: @Pericles

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa

     

    Last time I looked, South African students were busy tearing down their existing universities. So let's not waste money on that either.
    , @El Dato

    I especially noticed it due to the “challenges” western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of “youths” (or “teens” if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.
     
    A target-rich environment.

    This is why YT invented the European Longsword.
  97. @ATate
    Kenyans you say?

    Like this one;
    https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1077833/rutto-becomes-latest-kenyan-runner-to-be-suspended-in-doping-case

    And this one;
    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-athletics-kenya-idUKKCN1S30IP

    Her?
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jan/25/olympic-marathon-champion-jemima-sumgong-doping-ban-doubled-kenya-

    Or him;
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/48617732

    Perhaps this Kenyan
    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-athletics-kenya-idUKKCN1S30IP

    Kenyans are such great runners!
    https://www.runnersworld.com/uk/news/a776475/samuel-kalalei-recieves-doping-ban/

    Seems like one of the racist “trends” all you racist white racist need to stop noticing. You racists. It’s just one or two runners, not a lot....

    https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/kenya-bans-seven-more-athletes-for-doping-1.2447612?mode=amp

    7!? Big deal. Racist.

    Quotes from article; “43 Kenyans have now been suspended for doping with 40 of those in the last three years” and “Dozens of Kenyan athletes stormed the athletics federation headquarters in Nairobi earlier this month, locking out officials and demanding that top Athletics Kenya (AK) bosses step down following allegations of graft and doping cover-ups”

    43 back in 2015. Surely they immediately quit doping straight away.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/kenya-escapes-rio-olympics-ban-doping-iaaf

    “Kenya to escape Rio Olympics ban despite doping concerns, says IAAF”

    “Kenya will not be banned from competing at the Rio Olympics this summer despite serious concerns over the African country’s anti-doping program, the IAAF has revealed.”

    “https://www.ft.com/content/6e86e20a-5ca7-11e6-bb77-a121aa8abd95

    Rio Olympics 2016: Games hit by new Kenyan doping corruption allegations

    Track and field manager filmed allegedly asking for a bribe in return for advice”

    Kenyans.

    In 1992 Europeans, especially home country Spain, were catching up to the East Africans in distance running. Then in 1995 suddenly the East Africans were running astounding times. Most likely is Europeans had Epo in 1992 and East Africans didn’t get it until 1995.

  98. @Clyde

    Angela Saini isn’t all that bright, but she’s a very feminine lady, so she knows about as much about sports as I know about soap operas.
     
    Feminine by looks, yes. But no children or marriage so NO! She's a sleek, slippery harridan on race mixed with yer garden variety Hindu supremacist, living in The West of course! Female careerist nutcase.

    But no children or marriage so NO!

    She has a husband and a child.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    Thanks.... Her website and wikipedia make no mention of her being married and having a child. Here she is with her husband -- https://asianpowercouples.com/surname-d-f/
    , @Pericles
    Would she happen to have married within her caste?
  99. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    The average height difference between men and women is what, 5 or 6 inches? Yet there are men only four feet tall and others seven feet tall.

    Therefore “men are taller than women” is sexist pseudoscience.

  100. @Steve Sailer
    But no children or marriage so NO!

    She has a husband and a child.

    Thanks…. Her website and wikipedia make no mention of her being married and having a child. Here she is with her husband — https://asianpowercouples.com/surname-d-f/

  101. @trelane

    Angela Saini isn’t all that bright
     
    I noticed that too.

    “Angela Saini isn’t all that bright”

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn’t really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.
    , @Cloudbuster
    You met her, so you can "confirm" she's extremely bright? What did you do, interrogate her? Give her a standardized test? Not all people who appear charming and verbally facile are extremely bright. And degrees and certifications are certainly no guarantor of ability.

    Furthermore, being "extremely bright" is not much of a recommendation in this age. Intelligence is just a measure of mental horsepower. It doesn't tell anything about how that horsepower is used. If you take an extremely bright person and fill their head with garbage from an early age (probably describes 90% of people born after 1970), all you're going to get is prodigious production of garbage.
    , @Jack D

    My guess is that she doesn’t really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.
     
    I really doubt this. Her writing has the air of being written by a True Believer. If she is just a cynical faker doing this just for money, then she is an extremely talented writer because she writes in exactly the way a genuine True Believer would write. I don't think she's skilled enough as a writer to fake it so convincingly.
    , @Gaius Gracchus
    So she is just a liar. That was the only other option.
    , @Anonymous

    I can confirm that she is extremely bright
     
    Possible but more likely that you are mistaken. Smart enough Indians are the best in the world pretending that they are much smarter than they actually are. Nothing in Saini's background or career suggests that she is actually more than 120-125 points IQ smart (which is definitely not enough for being called "extremely bright").
  102. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem

    We could Stand on Zanzibar! (Well, nowadays we would need something larger.)

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

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I always assumed "Stand on Zanzibar," which was a famous sci-fi novel when I was in high school, was about humans fighting off an alien invasion by making their last stand on Zanzibar.

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

    , @Lot
    California is now growing in population more slowly than the USA as a whole for the first time since statehood. It may even lose a Congressional district in 2020’s reapportionment.

    It is a shame more people can’t enjoy the California dry mild climate in a sustainable way. As most of the rest of the USA swelters, highs in the SoCal coast were in the mid-70s with moderate humidity, low 80s a little bit inland, and mid 60s in San Francisco.
  103. @eah
    OT

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa -- it's remarkably banal -- but you do learn a thing or two: Yet most of Africa’s universities lack well-equipped laboratories, libraries and other basic infrastructure, such as a reliable electricity supply or Internet connection -- yes, I guess that's concerning when you're faced with problems such as "Africa’s population is projected to nearly quadruple over the next century" and you expect African universities to help with that and other "challenges".

    I especially noticed it due to the "challenges" western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of "youths" (or "teens" if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.

    A link to a tweet about that, which contains the disturbing video: "Be fearful of White men"@IlhanMN

    A link to the Twitter account of the Wash DC Hilton: @HiltonWash -- where they boast that the annual White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) is held there (presumably with more security) -- their latest tweet has at the moment 2 replies, both more or less trolling the hotel about this recent incident:

    https://twitter.com/lvlonghair1/status/1154780038203527168

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa

    Last time I looked, South African students were busy tearing down their existing universities. So let’s not waste money on that either.

  104. Lol, let’s just not choose an Indian to pontificate about sports. Next time, you get one column-inch per lap you can run around the Economist building, Angela, and no more!

  105. @Pericles

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem

     

    We could Stand on Zanzibar! (Well, nowadays we would need something larger.)

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

    I always assumed “Stand on Zanzibar,” which was a famous sci-fi novel when I was in high school, was about humans fighting off an alien invasion by making their last stand on Zanzibar.

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

    • Replies: @Pericles

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

     

    Well, if it's a last stand ...

    It was a pretty good novel as I recall, at least if you're in a dystopian mood.
    , @MEH 0910
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar#Title

    The primary engine of the novel's story is overpopulation and its projected consequences.[2] The title refers to an early twentieth-century claim that the world's population could fit onto the Isle of Wight—which has an area of 381 square kilometres (147 sq mi)—if they were all standing upright. Brunner remarked that the growing world population now required a larger island; the 3.5 billion people living in 1968 could stand together on the Isle of Man (area 572 square kilometres (221 sq mi)), while the 7 billion people who he (correctly) projected would be alive in 2010 would need to stand on Zanzibar (area 1,554 square kilometres (600 sq mi)).[4] Throughout the book, the image of the entire human race standing shoulder-to-shoulder on a small island is a metaphor for a crowded world.
     
    The World And Its People (1935)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2msa3V57LE
  106. @Anonymous
    True. To be more precise, though, it's not Kenyans - it's some subset of East Africans. Next to Kenyans in winning Olympic long runs and Prestige Marathons are folks from Ethiopia, Djibouti, Sudan, Uganda and Somali. Never Congolese or Nigerians. Applies to their women, too - albeit to a lesser extent.

    Exactly. Within these countries most runners come from the same tribe, such as the Kalenjin in Kenya and the Arsi in Ethiopia. The men on Kenya’s 2016 Olympic rugby team were the size American football tight ends and defintely not Kalenjin.

    About 75% of Kenya’s best runners come from just 1 of the country’s 40 tribes, the Kalenjin, who comprise approximately 10% of the total Kenyan population. Furthermore, many of Kenya’s best runners come from a subtribe of the Kalenjin known as the Nandi, who comprise only about 3% of the total Kenyan population. … A similar altitude-based geographical residence is seen among the Ethiopian runners, who come primarily from the Arsi tribal region and secondarily from the Shewa tribal region. Both the Arsis and Shewas have lived for centuries in the highlands of the Great Rift Valley, which extends northward from Kenya into southern and central Ethiopia.

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/517e/9d33f5fee8e519b9225bd47cd4b1de7f905a.pdf

    • Agree: Bruno
    • Replies: @bomag
    Very interesting.
  107. @obwandiyag
    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    “So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.”

    Seems reasonable to me. Skin colour is useful for large-scale lumping (black/white/yellow/red) but the Germans are a different race to the Italians – why can’t the Luo be a different race to the Bantu? Hell, the Scots aren’t the same as the English, although they mostly rub along OK.

    The Kenyans seem able to detect the different tribes just by looking at them, a useful attribute when its massacre time.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/02/kenya1

    • Replies: @BB753
    Americans are used to local African-Americans, who come in a wide variety of facial features and shades of brown, due to admixture, which is the reason they aren't good at recognizing patterns across real Africans.
  108. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    I also like Z Man’s version: The best team in baseball has a batting average of .286 while the worst team has an average of .230. But the differences between players within the best team’s roster are massively larger, running from .333 to .102.

    Therefore, it is ableist pseudoscience to think that the best team in baseball is “better at hitting” than the worst team.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    How can someone with a .102 batting average stay in the major leagues?
  109. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:

    I know it’s not quite the same thing, but a pointer in the right direction – what about the unique genetic mutations that the indigenous Andean and Tibetan peoples have in the blood cell physiology which enable them to thrive in low oxygen levels?

    Such is the power of genetic sweeps and natural selection, over a time period which is trivial in evolutionary terms. Thus, in pre modern times, any physiological selection which gave a survival edge to a particular gene pool in a particular mode of life would be selected for.

    Just what is controversial about that?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Then why aren't Andeans and Tibetans marathon champs too? E. Africans marathoners also tend to be from high altitudes but there must be something more than just high altitude.
    , @AnotherDad

    Such is the power of genetic sweeps and natural selection, over a time period which is trivial in evolutionary terms. Thus, in pre modern times, any physiological selection which gave a survival edge to a particular gene pool in a particular mode of life would be selected for.

    Just what is controversial about that?
     
    You're spot on Anon[201]. There's absolutely nothing controversial about selection at all.

    This entire "controversy" has absolutely nothing to do with any real scientific dispute at all.

    The dispute is entirely because some races do much better at "modern life" than other races ... and explaining those differences in biological terms undermines a very successful line of minoritarian attack upon coherent white gentile nations.

    That's it. There's no actual controversy that merits the name "science". It's simply that science undermines minoritarianism ... and that's hersey!
  110. @El Dato
    "university prose" outlet.

    You could have this big heading: "OUTLET" ("Nature is now OUTLET; bringing you the best in saince")

    "You know, my last paper appeared in OUTLET"
    "What was it about?"
    "Debunking heteronormative reverse-pansesxual tri-racial stereotypes in transgender bathroom encounters using Deep Learning"
    "Oh!"

    From dat room-temperature article:


    True complexity

    On intelligence, Evans dissects the work of twins researcher Robert Plomin, who has made the claim that IQ is highly heritable (see N. Comfort Nature 561, 461–463; 2018). Some have interpreted that as implying that there are genetic differences between population groups. But IQ is malleable. As Evans points out, “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”. Adoption into well-off families is associated with IQ gains of as much as 12–18 points. Research has shown that IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.

     

    How is "IQ is highly heritable" opposed to “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”.

    It isn't.


    IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.
     
    Yes. But so what. Well, "it's complex".

    I don’t know what study she is referring to by this Evans person. But she is likely talking about some version of Twin A being adopted into an affluent white Western family while Twin B is left to languish in a festering Nigerian slum. In that case, you can see IQ increases on the order of 12+ points. If this is the case and she wasn’t an anti-scientific liar, she would emphasize that the difference is caused by removing the child from an extremely deprived and pernicious environment.

    If she is talking about something else, I’m betting the real difference lies in the researcher’s willingness to use bad methodology or outright fraud.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The study is a French one of cross-class adoption. They wanted 40 children, 10 each in 4 quadrants: 10 rich kids adopted by poor parents, 10 rich kids adopted by poor parent, 10 poor kids adopted by rich parents, 10 poor kids adopted by poor parents. They only achieved a sample size of n=38, but it remains a quite interesting study because most adoption studies don't look at what screw-up parents do to their children. Adoption agencies try hard to find non-screw-up adoptive parents.

    They wound up finding that at age 14 IQ is 59% Nature and 41% Nurture. The sample size is very small, but the results seem pretty plausible to me.

  111. Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function.

    Apparently, because of selective breeding during slavery, our Negroes now have an extra calf muscle that gives them an advantage in professional sportsball:

    Don’t say we never did anything for ya, Magpies!

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Putting aside whether Kenyans really have them, it's clear from the animal world (and basic physics) that having long skinny legs is an advantage when it comes to running fast - see horses. You don't want a lot of weight to swing around down at the bottom while having long legs lengthens the amount of ground that you cover for each stroke. This is the same reason that the oars on racing shells are long and narrow.

    Over short distances, it may be that just being heavily muscled everywhere is better but over much longer distances the extra weight that more muscle bulk requires is going to tax your respiratory system.
  112. @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).

    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I’m not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a “proper” scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    As far as I know (which includes graduate-level biologists of my acquaintance) biology, including molecular biology, isn't necessarily math heavy. It sometimes seems to be about on the level of using a statistics package. But there are also subfields that are more demanding.
    , @Herbert West
    I think he was pointing out that her field of study was in a topic irrelevant to HBD, perhaps as a way to excuse her ignorance... however, she’s a professional liar (journalist) so she deserves no excuses
    , @Jay Ritchie
    I don't believe it is - my point is that she is writing about a field where she has little or no academic background.
    , @Jack D
    Not to speak for Jay, but I think you misunderstood his comment. As I read it, he was not denigrating biology as a science. Rather he was saying that while Saini has a decent science background (in engineering), her background does not equip her to make pronouncements regarding genetics.

    In my view, the fact that Saini does have something of a scientific background makes her bloviating worse - she should really know better. Her writing, as others in this thread have pointed out, is anything but scientific. It's pretty clear that she has a fixed and strongly felt point of view which clearly fulfills some emotional need in her (that "race does not exist") and that she dismisses all evidence to the contrary (and personally denigrates anyone holding contrary views) while eagerly accepting anyone who agrees with her. This is just not how science is (or should be) done.

    As I have mentioned before, when a scientific expert makes a pronouncement regarding his or her specific field of study, we should give those pronouncements serious consideration (although they may nevertheless be wrong anyway). However, when an engineer makes pronouncements on biology or a biologist speaks about a bridge collapse, their statements don't carry any more weight than a layman - when it comes to fields outside their own, they ARE laymen, despite their scientific training. Saini could be the poster girl for this - it's clear that she doesn't really have the foggiest idea what she is talking about when she makes her arguments regarding race and genetics and is no better than the most politicized studiez major - it's just the Leftism in her talking.

    , @megabar
    > I’m not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a “proper” scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    I agree. Credentialism is almost useless. Especially today, with the huge numbers of people getting degrees.

    A proper background to do research is (a) be smart enough, (b) specifically, logical/analytical enough, (c) learn about how to perform and analyze research, and (d) do enough of it to learn from your mistakes.

    There's no magic "research dust" you get sprinkled with in certain degrees, though if your college education involved novel research, you'll have a bit of a head start.

    There may be some patterns between the two degrees, and such patterns might be useful to say, a hiring department for a large firm. But not in evaluating the output of a particular person.

    In this case, the little I've read of Saini indicates that she buys into arguments that are not logically sound, which is not a mark in her favor.
    , @Abolish_public_education
    In terms of academic success, bio and engineering require different aptitudes.

    A good biology student needs a good memory and the ability to assimilate a broad array of facts. A good engineering student needs relatively stronger quantitative skills.

    My observation is that females can be very strong in life science while simultaneously weak in quantitative skills. Good male biologists generally show good math skills as well.

    Yes, there are exceptions.

    Regarding the frustration of learning biology, a PhD-level, (need I say ) male physicist once told me, “There’s no structure to it!”

    I think that nowadays, top, life science programs require two years of calculus.

  113. @trelane

    Angela Saini isn’t all that bright
     
    I noticed that too.

    She’s not very bright but she’s good at monkey see monkey do. And she’s the monkey.

  114. @Steve Sailer
    But no children or marriage so NO!

    She has a husband and a child.

    Would she happen to have married within her caste?

  115. @obwandiyag
    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    Sometimes I do wonder how black you are.

    (Kidding: I don’t.)

  116. Left wing political science is the only science that .after to her. She seems like a good Lysenkoist

  117. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    As far as I know (which includes graduate-level biologists of my acquaintance) biology, including molecular biology, isn’t necessarily math heavy. It sometimes seems to be about on the level of using a statistics package. But there are also subfields that are more demanding.

  118. Interesting, but sports and athletics have little value to the challenges of modern mankind.

  119. Obligatory: read the THE SPORTS GENE if you want to hear from someone who knows what he’s talking about

  120. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    I think he was pointing out that her field of study was in a topic irrelevant to HBD, perhaps as a way to excuse her ignorance… however, she’s a professional liar (journalist) so she deserves no excuses

  121. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    She believes what she wants to believe. Pretty common really.

  122. @Steve Sailer
    My impression is that Kenya's Olympians tend to be something like 3rd cousins of other Olympians. But it's all quite confusing because their runners often will adopt names to compete under that are tributes to older Kenyan star runners: Kipketer Kipchoge Keino.

    A problem I see with your reasoning is that you are not talking about a race, you are talking about a familial group that is adapted to a certain sport. That familial group also manages to keep their numbers at least stable generation after generation.

    I think sports is well suited to familial dynasties, except it doesn’t seem to happen much. But sports careers start and end much younger so there is more time to identify winners and have children.

    The Bernoulli family dynasty of geniuses went on for a while 1654-1935. But they don’t seem to exist anymore. One of the last wikipedia entries is Elisabeth Bernoulli (1873-1935), suffragette and campaigner against alcoholism, which might explain some of the reason the Bernoullis are no longer. Fun fact: Fermat’s Theorem slayer Andrew Wiles has 3 daughters, so maybe there will be a British math dynasty.

    There may be no easy way to maintain top tier intellectual dynasties, which means it would be hard to create a high IQ race.

    • Replies: @bomag
    A familial group would be a subset of a race.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    "it would be hard to create a high IQ race"

    Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and Ashkenazis beg to differ.

    If you're talking about the highest levels, in Western societies there seems to be something about exceptional, one in a billion IQ which doesn't make women queue up to have your babies.

    When the 6-year-old von Neumann caught his mother staring aimlessly, he asked her, "What are you calculating?"
     
    However, the Beijing Genomics Institute is trying to take the guesswork and romance out of high IQ families.
  123. @Patrick in SC

    … The politics of our age demand that we counteract ‘scientific’ racism not only with rigour, depth and empathy, but also without fear.
     
    What a bizarre statement.

    The politics of our age demand (How precisely is this "demand" enforced? The Police? Twitter mobs? the human resources department at work?) that we counteract 'scientific' racism (just put it in quotes and it's magically no longer science) not only with rigor, depth and empathy (Empathy for whom exactly?), but also without fear (Fear of who? The guy getting chased by the mob with pitchforks and torches? Fear of the guy in the U.K. getting hauled into police custody for talking about this stuff on the internet?)

    These people like to see themselves as brave and courageous fighters against the Man. They lack the self-awareness to realize that they ARE the Man now and they are the ones doing the bullying.

    • Agree: Unladen Swallow
    • Replies: @El Dato
    A good part of it is sheer trouble upstairs. There is no need to rage anymore, you can only rage against people pretending to take any of this seriously.

    https://i.imgur.com/8lw0QuT.png
  124. @Tiny Duck
    Well she's respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it

    Face it you guys lost

    Race doesn't exist

    Ohs Tinys……

    you be rite….she sho bein respekted by teh piers

  125. @Clyde

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.
     
    I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this. But you can eat a 50/50 mix of pea protein powder and rice protein powder and get about as dense as vegan protein gets. This is 85% protein and it hits all the amino acids. The way I eat is to mix the two powders in a bowl and stir in enough water or apple juice to make a porridge. Let hydrate for 5-10 minutes then eat. A tiny bit of salt or soy sauce adds to the flavor.
    Good grass fed whey- from Wisconsin https://www.amazon.com/Grass-Fed-Whey-Protein-Undenatured/dp/B07CN5GM5N/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Grass%2BFed%2BWhey%2BProtein&qid=1564218011&s=hpc&sr=1-4&th=1

    It certainly sounds delicious!

  126. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    She’s dishonest, which is why she attacks a strawman of “deep, unassailable differences between population groups.”

    That’s just a bunch of vague modifiers. Does Steve or anyone else who studies group differences claim they are “deep and unassailable?” What does that even mean?

    How about “persistent and grounded in genetic differences?” That’s concrete and well established by many scientific studies.

  127. @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    You met her, so you can “confirm” she’s extremely bright? What did you do, interrogate her? Give her a standardized test? Not all people who appear charming and verbally facile are extremely bright. And degrees and certifications are certainly no guarantor of ability.

    Furthermore, being “extremely bright” is not much of a recommendation in this age. Intelligence is just a measure of mental horsepower. It doesn’t tell anything about how that horsepower is used. If you take an extremely bright person and fill their head with garbage from an early age (probably describes 90% of people born after 1970), all you’re going to get is prodigious production of garbage.

  128. Lot says:
    @Pericles

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem

     

    We could Stand on Zanzibar! (Well, nowadays we would need something larger.)

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

    California is now growing in population more slowly than the USA as a whole for the first time since statehood. It may even lose a Congressional district in 2020’s reapportionment.

    It is a shame more people can’t enjoy the California dry mild climate in a sustainable way. As most of the rest of the USA swelters, highs in the SoCal coast were in the mid-70s with moderate humidity, low 80s a little bit inland, and mid 60s in San Francisco.

  129. @Hypnotoad666

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.
     
    For what it's worth, another strongman, Robert Oberest, is not impressed by Baboumian:

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

    > For what it’s worth, another strongman, Robert Oberest, is not impressed by Baboumian:

    Yeah, could be. I don’t pretend to know enough about this to vouch for Baboumian as elite or not. I think it’s fair to say that he looks pretty strong, and it’s also fair to say that I don’t really know what he eats.

    I do think that many of things we hold as gospel w.r.t. nutrition are likely wrong. If meat/milk are uniquely anabolic, it might have less to do with protein quantity, per se, than we think. One theory is that methionine is quite anabolic, and it does come in higher amounts in animal protein. One could imagine that milk in particular has other growth factors, given its role in the natural world.

    Of course, neither of those dispute that “main” point, that animal protein might make you bigger and stronger, which I think very well might be true.

  130. “…the taint that lingers…”

    I hereby declare that that is going to be the name of my punk band.

  131. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    I don’t believe it is – my point is that she is writing about a field where she has little or no academic background.

  132. @Anon

    Arguing with racists on points of fact is a game with no winners. Debating with them on their own terms, as Evans does, serves only as grist to their mill.
     
    Why did she write her own book, then, if deplatforming is the correct response?

    Racist ‘science’ must be seen for what it is: a way of rationalizing long-standing prejudices, to prop up a particular vision of society as racists would like it to be. It is about power. This is why, historically, work claiming to show deep racial differences has been of dismal quality. Racists don’t care if their data are weak and theories shoddy. They need only the thinnest veneer of scientific respectability to convince the unwitting.
     

    Dismal quality research, weak data, shoddy theories? This seems like exactly the sort of situation where "arguing on points of fact" would work.

    For instance, the review and the book reviewed mention Robert Plomin, a twins and adoption expert, then goes on to say, "As Evans points out, “One of the best ways to improve IQ if you are from a poor family is to get adopted as a baby”. Adoption into well-off families is associated with IQ gains of as much as 12–18 points."

    Oh, well, that solves it.

    And yet I have this nagging question: What does Plomin say about this line of research? He's hawking his own book. He's easy to get in contact with. He's appeared on tiny podcasts, and has been very generous with his time. Give him a call. If he hangs up on you, put that in your book.

    By the way, a more honest discusstion of this popped up in the discussion around the Turkheimer, et al., piece in Vox a couple of years ago:


    Are there significant limitations to studies on the effect of adoption on IQ? In our original post, we pointed out that adoption from a poor home to a well-off home is associated with a 12- to 18-point gain in IQ. This point was challenged from several angles.

    First, even when adoption produces substantial gains in the average IQs of adopted children, the magnitudes of the individual gains are better predicted by the IQs of the children’s biological parents than by the relative quality of the adoptive environment. This is true but irrelevant: It is merely evidence that IQ is partly heritable, which no one disputes. That effect (one more time) has no implications for understanding group differences. (The authoritative reference on this phenomenon, by the way, is Turkheimer, 1991.)

    What we care about is how high their IQs are, not whether the correlation between their IQs and their biological parents is higher or lower than the correlation with the IQs of the adoptive parents. The IQs of those adopted children are substantially higher than they would have been if they had been raised by their biological parents.

    Second, a previous study co-authored by Turkheimer found an adoption effect of only about 4.4 points. However, the magnitude of the increase afforded by adoption depends on the difference between the biological and adoptive homes. This particular adoption study was conducted in Sweden, using children adopted from homes of slightly less than average economic status into homes that were slightly higher than average. Krona for krona, the IQ gains were just about the same. Again, adoption into improved environments, even in a country with a strong social safety net and relatively slight economic differences between the social classes, increases IQ.
     

    https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/6/15/15797120/race-black-white-iq-response-critics

    This was Richard Nisbett, I believe, in the three-author Vox II piece. He was responding to Noam Stein:


    3. The cited adoption studies overstate the positive influence of an upper middle class environment

    Murray’s assertion that it is hard to raise the IQs of disadvantaged children leaves out the most important data point. Adoption from a poor family into a better-off one is associated with IQ gains of 12 to 18 points.

    Here the authors seem to be citing a meta-study of adopted and non-adopted siblings: in particular referencing the six studies with a total of 253 subjects where such a difference was analyzed. For example, there is one of French half-siblings, one raised in a working class environment and the other in an upper-middle class environment. They have significant limitations, as discussed in James J. Lee’s review of Vox author Richard E. Nisbett’s book on intelligence:

    [Long book extract]

    Even ignoring these confounds, as we have seen above the positive (and negative) effects of environment fade well into young adulthood, so IQ gains at 14 should not be taken for granted. Studies with larger samples and tested at later ages show much smaller effects, such as this one from Turkheimer himself on adopted Swedish children, or this study showing about a 7 IQ point boost going from low SES to a high SES environment.

    Interestingly, like the Flynn effect — and unlike racial group differences in IQ — adoptees show gains in IQ on the subtests least associated with the g factor”:
     

    https://medium.com/@houstoneuler/the-cherry-picked-science-in-voxs-charles-murray-article-bd534a9c4476

    So, there is a legitimate debate here among specialists "arguing on points of fact."

    Dismal quality research, weak data, shoddy theories

    Not a good line of argument when better research, better data, and better theories keep reaching the same conclusions.

  133. @Hypnotoad666
    That's my recollection of Gould as well. Saini is really following in his footsteps as a hack who sells books by loudly shouting politically correct conclusions without proof. She's just lots dumber and, as befitting the current year, is more over the top in her invective than Gould was.

    I just read her review and -- blecht! It's absolutely awful on every level, including simply as a book review. She shamelessly plugs her own book and then launches into a generic anti-racism rant. She doesn't seem the least bit interested in Evans book and it's unclear whether she has actually read it.

    It's probably not surprising that she sees his book primarily as competition for her own. All SJW hack authors from Gould to the present are simply recycling the same interchangeable hack arguments:

    (a) Racism is super plus ultra bad therefore findings of racial differences must be wrong. They just have to be!

    (b) Person X's scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he once said something heretical.

    (c) Person's Y's scientific findings of racial differences must also be dismissed because he said something good about person X (who is bad).

    (d) Person Z's scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because he failed to condemn person X or person Y.

    (e) Any scientific findings of racial differences must be dismissed because they couldn't prove that an unknown and unidentifiable environmental factor wasn't actually causing the observed difference.

    (f) "Intelligence isn't real anyway;" everyone is smart and special in their own unique way!

    (g) "Hey look, a squirrel!"

    People like Saini really don't deserve to be called "science writers" at all. Maybe "science-adjacent" writers or "science-skeptics," or something.

    Science-adjacent is exactly what metaphysics means. Physics is Greek for nature and referred to how a school or person believed the world worked. Metaphysics was how one should judge good and evil and how one should live.

  134. @Abolish_public_education
    All the competitive, long distance runners I’ve ever known were slender (Gumby!).

    I do not question that champion athletes are often born with advantages, i.e. genetics.

    A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    The blogger seems to be under the impression that champion, 10,000+ meter runners ought to present diverse body types. As though they were PGA touring pros.

    > A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    So, 50-75 miles per week. That’s 5,000-7,500 extra calories per week, or 1,000 extra per day. Michael Phelps famously ate 12,000 calories per day at one point, though that is no doubt atypical, and probably in large part due to the need to generate heat when you’re in water all day. But if a normal person of a marathoner’s size eats 3,000/day, then a marathoner would only need to eat 4,000/day to avoid catabolism due to caloric inadequacy. The 12,000 Phelps ate simply shows that if the body wants to, it can eat and metabolize a lot of food — certainly an extra 1,000/day.

    My guess is that the hormonal profile a body generates after endurance exercise is simply not geared for muscle-building, as with power exercises.

    Put another way, if a marathoner were to overeat, they’d likely become skinny-fat, where they have low muscle mass but some excess fat. If a powerlifter overeats, they’ll become muscular-fat, where they have big muscles but also excess fat. The difference in how the extra calories are used is whether the body is outputting anabolic or catabolic hormones.

    That jibes with the people I see in real life, though it’s possible I’m just operating on confirmation bias, or mistaking cause with effect (i.e. skinny people might be drawn to run, muscular people to lift).

    • Replies: @Abolish_public_education
    Endurance running:swimming (or biking) comparisons are a bit apples to oranges.
  135. @Clyde

    I’m not sure exactly how much more protein power atheletes need, but one of the strongest dudes in the world (Patrick Baboumian) is vegan. Though I believe he does focus on protein-rich plants.
     
    I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this. But you can eat a 50/50 mix of pea protein powder and rice protein powder and get about as dense as vegan protein gets. This is 85% protein and it hits all the amino acids. The way I eat is to mix the two powders in a bowl and stir in enough water or apple juice to make a porridge. Let hydrate for 5-10 minutes then eat. A tiny bit of salt or soy sauce adds to the flavor.
    Good grass fed whey- from Wisconsin https://www.amazon.com/Grass-Fed-Whey-Protein-Undenatured/dp/B07CN5GM5N/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Grass%2BFed%2BWhey%2BProtein&qid=1564218011&s=hpc&sr=1-4&th=1

    > I feel animal protein is the most assimilated and the most usable and include whey on this.

    Yup, could be! My point only is that if this is true, there’s likely something beyond just protein adequacy. I can’t remember the details, but I recall that even for power lifters, the amount of protein needed to stay in positive nitrogen balance isn’t really that high.

    The extra protein, the assimilibility, or the mix of amino acids in animal protein, may be useful in shifting your hormonal profile into being more anabolic. Or perhaps it’s something else altogether.

  136. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    Not to speak for Jay, but I think you misunderstood his comment. As I read it, he was not denigrating biology as a science. Rather he was saying that while Saini has a decent science background (in engineering), her background does not equip her to make pronouncements regarding genetics.

    In my view, the fact that Saini does have something of a scientific background makes her bloviating worse – she should really know better. Her writing, as others in this thread have pointed out, is anything but scientific. It’s pretty clear that she has a fixed and strongly felt point of view which clearly fulfills some emotional need in her (that “race does not exist”) and that she dismisses all evidence to the contrary (and personally denigrates anyone holding contrary views) while eagerly accepting anyone who agrees with her. This is just not how science is (or should be) done.

    As I have mentioned before, when a scientific expert makes a pronouncement regarding his or her specific field of study, we should give those pronouncements serious consideration (although they may nevertheless be wrong anyway). However, when an engineer makes pronouncements on biology or a biologist speaks about a bridge collapse, their statements don’t carry any more weight than a layman – when it comes to fields outside their own, they ARE laymen, despite their scientific training. Saini could be the poster girl for this – it’s clear that she doesn’t really have the foggiest idea what she is talking about when she makes her arguments regarding race and genetics and is no better than the most politicized studiez major – it’s just the Leftism in her talking.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    Thank you. That clears up my puzzlement.
  137. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    > I’m not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a “proper” scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    I agree. Credentialism is almost useless. Especially today, with the huge numbers of people getting degrees.

    A proper background to do research is (a) be smart enough, (b) specifically, logical/analytical enough, (c) learn about how to perform and analyze research, and (d) do enough of it to learn from your mistakes.

    There’s no magic “research dust” you get sprinkled with in certain degrees, though if your college education involved novel research, you’ll have a bit of a head start.

    There may be some patterns between the two degrees, and such patterns might be useful to say, a hiring department for a large firm. But not in evaluating the output of a particular person.

    In this case, the little I’ve read of Saini indicates that she buys into arguments that are not logically sound, which is not a mark in her favor.

    • Replies: @Anon
    A "proper" scientific background has to include the core science pillar of the research statistics class that teaches one how to read, critique, and theoretically conduct science. This class generally is offered in graduate science programs, starting at the Masters level.

    It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn't have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does. At least technically speaking. Where you would want to go from there in terms of critiquing someone's discipline-specific credentials is a matter of personal opinion.

    If taught how to read research (for a scientist, which always implies a process of simultaneous critique), an individual is generally equipped to muddle through cross-discipline research if they understand the vocabulary.

    However, what is true is that modern education generally affords little to no cross-discipline knowledge. Which means that someone with an engineering degree is as about as knowledge-equipped as a janitor to comment on genetics. If an engineer has a Master of Science degree or greater, then they will at least be able to critique general research conclusions for ignored variables and contradicting evidence that might render the research as lower quality evidence.

    That's about where the value of a "proper science credentials" begins and ends in terms of cross-discipline critique.

  138. Isn’t “diversity” theory nothing but a psuedo-science?

    The SJWs first claim we are inherently different because of our demographic differences.

    Then Saini comes along and says that we can’t be “diverse” because the differences aren’t backed by “real” science.

    So is “diversity” nothing but a scam?

  139. @Jack D
    These people like to see themselves as brave and courageous fighters against the Man. They lack the self-awareness to realize that they ARE the Man now and they are the ones doing the bullying.

    A good part of it is sheer trouble upstairs. There is no need to rage anymore, you can only rage against people pretending to take any of this seriously.

  140. @Jack D
    Not to speak for Jay, but I think you misunderstood his comment. As I read it, he was not denigrating biology as a science. Rather he was saying that while Saini has a decent science background (in engineering), her background does not equip her to make pronouncements regarding genetics.

    In my view, the fact that Saini does have something of a scientific background makes her bloviating worse - she should really know better. Her writing, as others in this thread have pointed out, is anything but scientific. It's pretty clear that she has a fixed and strongly felt point of view which clearly fulfills some emotional need in her (that "race does not exist") and that she dismisses all evidence to the contrary (and personally denigrates anyone holding contrary views) while eagerly accepting anyone who agrees with her. This is just not how science is (or should be) done.

    As I have mentioned before, when a scientific expert makes a pronouncement regarding his or her specific field of study, we should give those pronouncements serious consideration (although they may nevertheless be wrong anyway). However, when an engineer makes pronouncements on biology or a biologist speaks about a bridge collapse, their statements don't carry any more weight than a layman - when it comes to fields outside their own, they ARE laymen, despite their scientific training. Saini could be the poster girl for this - it's clear that she doesn't really have the foggiest idea what she is talking about when she makes her arguments regarding race and genetics and is no better than the most politicized studiez major - it's just the Leftism in her talking.

    Thank you. That clears up my puzzlement.

  141. @eah
    OT

    Here is another Nature editorial I saw and read: Build science in Africa -- it's remarkably banal -- but you do learn a thing or two: Yet most of Africa’s universities lack well-equipped laboratories, libraries and other basic infrastructure, such as a reliable electricity supply or Internet connection -- yes, I guess that's concerning when you're faced with problems such as "Africa’s population is projected to nearly quadruple over the next century" and you expect African universities to help with that and other "challenges".

    I especially noticed it due to the "challenges" western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of "youths" (or "teens" if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.

    A link to a tweet about that, which contains the disturbing video: "Be fearful of White men"@IlhanMN

    A link to the Twitter account of the Wash DC Hilton: @HiltonWash -- where they boast that the annual White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) is held there (presumably with more security) -- their latest tweet has at the moment 2 replies, both more or less trolling the hotel about this recent incident:

    https://twitter.com/lvlonghair1/status/1154780038203527168

    I especially noticed it due to the “challenges” western countries face with their own African populations, as (perhaps a bit unfairly) exemplified by the recent beating of an older white man by a mob of “youths” (or “teens” if you prefer) directly in front of the main entrance to the Wash DC Hilton hotel.

    A target-rich environment.

    This is why YT invented the European Longsword.

  142. @Digital Samizdat

    Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function.
     
    Apparently, because of selective breeding during slavery, our Negroes now have an extra calf muscle that gives them an advantage in professional sportsball:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzB7IsmOegE

    Don't say we never did anything for ya, Magpies!

    Putting aside whether Kenyans really have them, it’s clear from the animal world (and basic physics) that having long skinny legs is an advantage when it comes to running fast – see horses. You don’t want a lot of weight to swing around down at the bottom while having long legs lengthens the amount of ground that you cover for each stroke. This is the same reason that the oars on racing shells are long and narrow.

    Over short distances, it may be that just being heavily muscled everywhere is better but over much longer distances the extra weight that more muscle bulk requires is going to tax your respiratory system.

    • Replies: @cthulhu


    Over short distances, it may be that just being heavily muscled everywhere is better but over much longer distances the extra weight that more muscle bulk requires is going to tax your respiratory system.

     

    To first order, it’s all basic physics.

    For short distance, it’s all about power - the rate at which energy is expended - and how efficiently that power can be converted into acceleration. In a world class 100 meter sprint, the runners are still accelerating, at least a little, at the finish. Once you get past about 100 meters, the runners are no longer accelerating, but their ability to accelerate for the first half of the race is still paramount. As the distance increases, it starts becoming more and more about efficiency - e.g., minimizing parasitic losses in locomotion; the vast majority of the race is run at constant speed.

    So the sprinters need plenty of muscle, optimized for short bursts of power, and a skeletal architecture that can efficiently turn that power into force at the foot-ground contact point; good sprinters are heavily muscled and taller than average - although Usain Bolt is an anomaly; it takes a lot more power to swing those very long legs back and forth fast enough to win against somewhat shorter opponents. The distance runners need efficient cardiovascular systems and biomechanics that minimizes parasitic losses, which means light weight and long limbs for mechanical efficiency - but not too long, because longer legs have more mass, which increases parasitic losses.
  143. ‘science’

    ‘Angela Saini’

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Angela Saincy!
  144. @Steve Sailer
    I told Saini last year she should interview Obama: he could help her get up to speed on sports.

    I told Saini last year she should interview Obama: he could help her get up to speed on sports.

    I hereby challenge Angela Saini and Barack Obama to a home run hitting contest at Fenway Park or Yankee Stadium or Wrigley Field.

    Wooden bats, MLB baseballs and a pitcher of your choice and Ed Dutton as the announcer dressed as Babe Ruth in a woolen uniform. The English like wool. New Englanders, judging from all the rock walls in the woods, like wool too.

  145. @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    My guess is that she doesn’t really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    I really doubt this. Her writing has the air of being written by a True Believer. If she is just a cynical faker doing this just for money, then she is an extremely talented writer because she writes in exactly the way a genuine True Believer would write. I don’t think she’s skilled enough as a writer to fake it so convincingly.

  146. @Interested Bystander
    I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.” I tried to think of a more appropriate name for it, but the best I could come up with is “Social Construction.” I welcome other suggestion from the witty readers of this blog....

    Instead of Nature, call it Narrative.

    Has the feature of shared lettering.

  147. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    Her job is to simply contradict the truth.

  148. Anon[214] • Disclaimer says:

    Its unnecessary to entertain any non-White person’s attacks on the legitimacy of race, which as we know is always directed at the generalized White race.

    Because they inherently have social and political stakes in making their arguments. They are turning their politics into pseudo-science, an act that always results in sub-par arguments that require that better counter arguments be ignored to uphold the lie.

    Ignoring non-Whites includes ignoring Gould and Saini. The former belongs to a socio-political group with the most zealous and politicized racial ethic in the world with documented (by them) race-hostile objectives that are still in-progress. Gould as polar opposite of an objective, credible source as we have.

    As for Saini, I’m sure that she would like nothing more than for the greater West to not hold her race accountable for the conditions of the nations in which her race dominates.

  149. @Anonymous
    I know it's not quite the same thing, but a pointer in the right direction - what about the unique genetic mutations that the indigenous Andean and Tibetan peoples have in the blood cell physiology which enable them to thrive in low oxygen levels?

    Such is the power of genetic sweeps and natural selection, over a time period which is trivial in evolutionary terms. Thus, in pre modern times, any physiological selection which gave a survival edge to a particular gene pool in a particular mode of life would be selected for.

    Just what is controversial about that?

    Then why aren’t Andeans and Tibetans marathon champs too? E. Africans marathoners also tend to be from high altitudes but there must be something more than just high altitude.

  150. Ed Dutton is getting pushed around by some filthy billionaire internet corporation controllers.

    The Virginia Company must dislodge the current controllers of the internet from power and put people in charge who will let guys like Ed Dutton have their say.

    Obama most likely has some Virginia Company ancestry from his Dunham side.

    The JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire and the JEW/ENGLISH ruling class of England is using interloper lantern holder propaganda puppets to push anti-White propaganda.

    Ed Dutton is getting pushed around by foreigner thugs such as Angela Saini and it is extremely irritating to see.

    Ed Dutton is English and proud of it, and Ed Dutton will keep fighting until victory is assured and the battle has been won.

    Ed Dutton Fights On, So I Shall Too!

    I like Ed Dutton much better than that departed Democrat Party oaf Fred Dutton.

  151. @George
    "Kenyan athletes"

    Nation states, like Kenya, are an artificial constructs. Maybe a small subgroup of persons, who mostly live in Kenya, are marathon adapted but not Kenyan Nationals as a whole.

    This falls under the category of “everyone knows what he’s talking about.”

  152. @YetAnotherAnon

    "So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica."
     
    Seems reasonable to me. Skin colour is useful for large-scale lumping (black/white/yellow/red) but the Germans are a different race to the Italians - why can't the Luo be a different race to the Bantu? Hell, the Scots aren't the same as the English, although they mostly rub along OK.

    The Kenyans seem able to detect the different tribes just by looking at them, a useful attribute when its massacre time.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/02/kenya1

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_X8nUi3n-gkI/R3wPLCdmSQI/AAAAAAAAALs/oUzEzFTvesw/s400/kenya_ethnic416x313.gif

    Americans are used to local African-Americans, who come in a wide variety of facial features and shades of brown, due to admixture, which is the reason they aren’t good at recognizing patterns across real Africans.

  153. @George
    "Kenyan athletes"

    Nation states, like Kenya, are an artificial constructs. Maybe a small subgroup of persons, who mostly live in Kenya, are marathon adapted but not Kenyan Nationals as a whole.

    That’s correct. The marathoners are all from a specific ethno-linguistic group (the “Kalenjin”) of Nilotic people who live in only 1 part of Kenya.

    The racist Wikipedia has this to say about Nilotic people (since race doesn’t really exist, this is just racist babbling and has no foundation in fact – Nilotic people are in reality indistinguishable from other non-existent “races” such as East Asians and are no more likely to be tall, skinny or dark than the average Vietnamese, for example):

    Physically, Nilotes are noted for their typically very dark skin color and slender, tall bodies. They often possess exceptionally long limbs, particularly vis-a-vis the distal segments (forearms, calves). This characteristic is thought to be a climatic adaptation to allow their bodies to shed heat more efficiently.

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

    Anyone who notices that Nilotes tend to be tall, slender and dark skinned is just a racist.

    Most American slaves were West African Bantus and not Nilotes so we don’t see their body type that much in American blacks.

    • Agree: Clyde
  154. @eah
    The editorial section of Nature will sink that entire publication yet.

    EDITORIAL 02 JULY 2019 -- Nature is proud to support Pride in STEM -- This year’s International Day of LGBTQ+ People in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths has our fullest backing.

    Ah, yes: “Pride in STEM” day! When I saw that, I read it aloud to my son, whose response was “They’re not satisfied with the entire month of June?” No, boy, they’re not and never will be.

    Nature publishes a lot of cutting-edge research and thus remains a must-read for me. But my nose must now support a clothespin as well as eyeglasses.

  155. Saini has an active and powerful SJW network conspiring in her favour. She gets lauded for incredible crap.

    Good example of this: if you go on to amazon.co.uk and look at the reviews of her latest book, you will see a big collection of favourable reviews of her trash-science garbage pile of a book, and almost no negative reviews.

    Amazon hires “review moderators” who see it as their main duty to delete non-SJW-consistent book reviews. So this type of censorship makes Saini look like a credible popular science writer. The SJW network will not allow her to be exposed as fraudulent in the mainstream media.

    Are the US “review moderators” also active at amazon.com in only allowing SJW-consistent book reviews? It slants the discussion badly. Saini is the perfect example of this.

  156. For those who are interested, Angela Saini was on a team, last Christmas, of four alumni representing King’s College, London in a quiz show. She is introduced around 2:51.

    • Agree: jim jones
    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    All I see are 8 IYIs. What's interesting about that?

    Ms. Saini is no Sunny Leone.
    , @Lurker
    The BBC somehow ended up with two men on the other team. Clearly they need to look more closely at future casting decisions. And Jeremy Paxman (host) will perhaps be the last straight, white man presenting this show?
  157. There’s an ideal body type for sprints and marathons. Bolt is taller than normal, but if look at the sub-10 second sprinters they look amazingly similar from the neck down. Same with marathon runners. For that you need long legs, big heart and lungs, and as little upper body as you can manage. Or look at all the Tour De France guys. Same body type.

    You can practice all you want, but if you’re a bulky 5-9 175 lbs your chance of winning a World class Marathon is Zero.

    So of course its all genetic. Its just a matter of getting people with the right body type, and providing them with adequate training. Its just running. Its not like elite Tennis or Golf where you have to start young and spend YEARS practicing how the hit the ball well enough to win Professional Tournaments.

  158. Anon[189] • Disclaimer says:
    @obwandiyag
    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    Black people as a generalized group have the widest genetic variance on the planet, wholly due to the fact that early Homo sapiens women (the race represented by Cro Magnon man) were raped by (indicated by he lack of [female] hominid mtDNA in the human genetic pool) a wide range of still-lurking archaic hominid species as those early unmixed humans explored Africa.

    They were raped by the closest thing to demons that have manifested on this planet: Erectus, Heidelbergensis, Habilis, and Australopithecus. All undoubtedly brutal, relatively low IQ cannibals. What is notably absent is Neanderthal hominid admixture.

    Together the generalized group of humans that are mixed with this admixture, whose source falls within the range of dark skinned archaic hominids, represent the “Black race”: the telling physical feature being the human-expressed version of the unique Black skin and wooly black hair of those archaic hominids.

    Within the Black race, there will be geographical differences in hominid-specific admixture depending on the historical location of any one archaic hominid hive. These geographically based admixture differences account for the wide variance within the broader Black race.

    Unmixed humans on the Eurasian continent faced a similar threat from Neanderthal, who was a much more advanced hominid than the archaic hominids from Africa: yet still not fully human.

    Similar to what occurred in Africa, homo sapiens were raped by Neanderthal to produce a new racial strain, which we find has its home in the Armenoid race that finds its modern racial locus in Armenians, Jews, Arabs, and any group that mixes with these groups to any significant degree. Their phenotypic expression, compared to Neanderthal skulls and reconstructions, is an obvious tell. The primary Eastern hominid hives were in Armenia and Israel.

    The same thing occurred in Asia with Western neanderthal species and a hominid known as Denisovan to create the generalized modern East Asian race. Austro-aboriginees are a result of a similar process with their own brand of native archaic hominids.

    This latter group is especially telling to look at, as due to their longtime isolation from unmixed human genetics as well as redder skin the detail of the hominid admixture is especially observable in their phenotypic expression. Its often like looking at an early generation hominid-human mix.

    I have all of the science that proves these conclusions. I’ve posted it here before, several times. Let me know if you need me to post it again.

  159. @Patrick in SC

    Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.
     
    Because no scientific hypothesis ever needs to be re-assessed with the passage of time. And the further the critique recedes into history, the more untouchable it becomes. That's how real science works! It's not like there have been any advances in genetics, for example, since 1981.

    It’s also not like Gould’s book did what she claims it did. It was all lies that proved nothing.

  160. @megabar
    > Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in “debunking” Morton’s “racist” skull measurement study?

    Even more, Gould's book says little of importance, even if every fact in his book were true. IIRC, the book tried to establish the following:

    * Some intelligence researchers are/were biased, and sought to confirm their own belief that Europeans are the smartest race
    * Some early measurements of brain case size and other elements of physiognomy may have been incorrect and/or fudged
    * Early intelligence testing was flawed, and unfair to people with less cultural immersion as compared to NW European Americans.
    * Some conceptions of intelligence are wrong. For example, the idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the "engine" of intelligence is flawed, and falls in the face of certain statistical analyses.

    At best, this would cause you to ignore or look more critically at some lines of evidence. It does not come close to "debunking" the racial line of reasoning.

    Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of “reification” . According to Gould, proponents of IQ believed that IQ was a “thing” and not just a rating scale. The pressure in your circulatory system is a “thing” and you can measure it fairly directly. But IQ is not one single thing, therefore it does not exist at all, according to Gould.

    This is profoundly wrong. Let’s take reading for example. You can test people on reading and conclude that individual X reads at the 2nd grade level or at the 5th percentile of his age group. There are numerous tests for this and they would all more or less agree as to X’s grade level or percentile. However, these tests are all indirect – there is no reading gauge that you can wrap around someone’s arm and determine reading ability as a number on a dial.

    The ability to read and write is not a “thing” or one thing. It is actually a combination of a whole bunch of different skills – ability to recognize shapes, to attach sounds to shapes, to combine sounds into words, to connect words into sentences, to gain meaning from a sentence, the motor control needed to form the letters on paper, etc. A deficiency in any one of these things would reduce your ability to read and write. Nevertheless, it’s perfectly valid and scientific to say “X reads at the 2nd grade level.” You can show X a newspaper or a novel or a comic book and if his reading score is low he’s going to have difficulty reading any one of them.

    IQ is the exact same thing – it measures our ability to comprehend and process concepts in any field. It was invented when scientists noted that the same kids who did well in one subject in school tended to do well in ALL subjects and decided that there should be a way to figure out who these kids were and sum it all up in one number (or a few numbers). Again it works with great consistency – you can give someone the Wechsler test and then the Stanford-Binet test and they will usually agree to within a few points. You can give the same person these tests over a period of years and the numbers will remain fairly constant.

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Disagree: utu
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    Very well said Jack.

    This whole "IQ isn't a real thing" or "IQ isn't intelligence but ..." is either stupid or dishonest.

    Sure, we're often sloppy with our language, but no one is confused. IQ isn't intelligence, it's a measure of intelligence.

    Sure, it isn't like height--or your example of blood pressure--because for those things the measurement is a pretty good handle on the thing itself. (Although even those move around a bit so you could say your blood pressure score isn't really your "real" blood pressure.) Intelligence--and more generally the quality of functioning of our brains--is way more complex.

    But IQ is ... "good enough" and certainly useful. It correlates really well with academic learning, with the ability to learn new stuff and do well in a vast swathe of occupations and generally with life outcomes. And that's what matters.

    The objections that it isn't really "intelligence" because "intelligence" is way to complex are true and utterly pointless. Lots of things are too complex to come up with simple measurement that captures all their complexity, but that doesn't mean we can't get a good handle on them. We don't have a simple measurement for "cute" either, but--the Potter Stewart test--"i know it when i see it" is good enough. IQ is plenty good enough.
    , @megabar
    > Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of “reification”

    Yeah, reification was one of many, many new words I learned whilst reading MoM. Mr. Gould certainly had an excellent vocabulary. I've forgotten most of the words, but reification stuck through sheer repetition.

    Gould also argued that a single source of intellect was not indicated by test results. A person could be good at math, but a so-so reader. Another person could be the opposite. Thus, it is unlikely that humans are entirely governed by one "intellect engine." And in fact, that's likely true.

    But it's just a straw man stand-in for the actual argument, which doesn't particularly care if useful intelligence is a single or cluster of traits. I kept waiting for Gould to explain how his attack on the straw man bore on the real argument, but he never did.
  161. Anon[412] • Disclaimer says:
    @megabar
    > I’m not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a “proper” scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    I agree. Credentialism is almost useless. Especially today, with the huge numbers of people getting degrees.

    A proper background to do research is (a) be smart enough, (b) specifically, logical/analytical enough, (c) learn about how to perform and analyze research, and (d) do enough of it to learn from your mistakes.

    There's no magic "research dust" you get sprinkled with in certain degrees, though if your college education involved novel research, you'll have a bit of a head start.

    There may be some patterns between the two degrees, and such patterns might be useful to say, a hiring department for a large firm. But not in evaluating the output of a particular person.

    In this case, the little I've read of Saini indicates that she buys into arguments that are not logically sound, which is not a mark in her favor.

    A “proper” scientific background has to include the core science pillar of the research statistics class that teaches one how to read, critique, and theoretically conduct science. This class generally is offered in graduate science programs, starting at the Masters level.

    It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn’t have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does. At least technically speaking. Where you would want to go from there in terms of critiquing someone’s discipline-specific credentials is a matter of personal opinion.

    If taught how to read research (for a scientist, which always implies a process of simultaneous critique), an individual is generally equipped to muddle through cross-discipline research if they understand the vocabulary.

    However, what is true is that modern education generally affords little to no cross-discipline knowledge. Which means that someone with an engineering degree is as about as knowledge-equipped as a janitor to comment on genetics. If an engineer has a Master of Science degree or greater, then they will at least be able to critique general research conclusions for ignored variables and contradicting evidence that might render the research as lower quality evidence.

    That’s about where the value of a “proper science credentials” begins and ends in terms of cross-discipline critique.

    • Replies: @megabar
    > It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn’t have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does.

    With respect, this does not at all follow. It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree. Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.

    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn't. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.

    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn't hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence. This works in both directions. Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.
  162. “In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

    -Theodore Dalrymple

    It should be noted that our society’s political correctness and communism are not examples of convergent evolution. PC is the daughter of communism.

  163. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    Probably a bit of all three. I don’t think she’s exceptionally bright, and I don’t think she completely believes everything she says, but I do think she does get high off her own supply.

  164. Anon[271] • Disclaimer says:

    Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of “reification” . According to Gould, proponents of IQ believed that IQ was a “thing” and not just a rating scale. The pressure in your circulatory system is a “thing” and you can measure it fairly directly. But IQ is not one single thing, therefore it does not exist at all, according to Gould.

    Any honest and relatively smart person with science training would immediately flag Gould’s conclusion as glaringly shoddy and offer an easy and decisive critique that would have Gould rewrite his thesis if it had been subject to an honest peer review.

    (I say “relatively smart” because science programs have dumbed down their admissions standards across the board).

    That such a thesis would pass as worthy of publishing by the science community, let alone be protected from post-publishing critique, is evidence of the political corruption of the science community’s core.

    There are myriad of measurements across the vast range of science that serve as perfectly valid and correlative proxy measurements for a whole that theoretically cannot be measured all at once or in total.

    Above is the single argument that rebuts Gould’s political science with finality. What would follow in a full counter argument would be a number of examples followed by IQ test result correlations with measurements of applied ability (academic achievement, profession, income, etc).

    That such an easy and obvious argument has not buried Gould is evidence of the science communities political corruption toward the protection of some group interests and agendas at the expense of other groups.

  165. @megabar
    > A 10-mile run is one thing. Training for endurance, e.g. 10+ miles, 5+X per week, is quite another: The body just burns whatever fuel it can get. There’s no reserve, raw material with which to put on muscle.

    So, 50-75 miles per week. That's 5,000-7,500 extra calories per week, or 1,000 extra per day. Michael Phelps famously ate 12,000 calories per day at one point, though that is no doubt atypical, and probably in large part due to the need to generate heat when you're in water all day. But if a normal person of a marathoner's size eats 3,000/day, then a marathoner would only need to eat 4,000/day to avoid catabolism due to caloric inadequacy. The 12,000 Phelps ate simply shows that if the body wants to, it can eat and metabolize a lot of food -- certainly an extra 1,000/day.

    My guess is that the hormonal profile a body generates after endurance exercise is simply not geared for muscle-building, as with power exercises.

    Put another way, if a marathoner were to overeat, they'd likely become skinny-fat, where they have low muscle mass but some excess fat. If a powerlifter overeats, they'll become muscular-fat, where they have big muscles but also excess fat. The difference in how the extra calories are used is whether the body is outputting anabolic or catabolic hormones.

    That jibes with the people I see in real life, though it's possible I'm just operating on confirmation bias, or mistaking cause with effect (i.e. skinny people might be drawn to run, muscular people to lift).

    Endurance running:swimming (or biking) comparisons are a bit apples to oranges.

  166. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Utter lunacy. Where would the food be grown? And who would be ok with cutting down all the forests in CA? Riley is truly demonic.

  167. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    In January in Chicago the temperature ranges from -25°F to 65°F. The mean temperature in January is 25°F and the mean temperature in July is 70°F. Since intra-month variation is greater than inter-month variation, seasons don’t exist, racist.

    That’s literally how these people think.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
    BTW, don’t bother using that example with these people in order to demonstrate the fallacy of their beliefs. I’ve used a simile like that proving that mountain ranges don’t exist.
    They simply lack the logical faculties to follow it, think you’re trying to confuse them with some Jedi mind trick, get very irritated, and change the subject. You may as well try to explain a calculus problem to a Golden Retriever.
    , @kaganovitch
    Not that your point is mistaken, but your analogy is the opposite of the the point you're trying to make.
    , @obwandiyag
    Argument by analogy is odious. You are wrong. Genetics is not temperature. Your kind of "logic" is commonly known as fatuous, or more benignly, sophomoric.
  168. @PiltdownMan

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology).
     
    Biology is a hard science. An engineering degree at the undergraduate level might require a greater mastery of bits of applied mathematics, especially calculus/differential equations, enroute to graduation, but not necessarily. I'm not entirely sure I understand why an engineering degree is a "proper" scientific background, while a degree in biology is not.

    In terms of academic success, bio and engineering require different aptitudes.

    A good biology student needs a good memory and the ability to assimilate a broad array of facts. A good engineering student needs relatively stronger quantitative skills.

    My observation is that females can be very strong in life science while simultaneously weak in quantitative skills. Good male biologists generally show good math skills as well.

    Yes, there are exceptions.

    Regarding the frustration of learning biology, a PhD-level, (need I say ) male physicist once told me, “There’s no structure to it!”

    I think that nowadays, top, life science programs require two years of calculus.

  169. @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    So she is just a liar. That was the only other option.

  170. @PiltdownMan
    For those who are interested, Angela Saini was on a team, last Christmas, of four alumni representing King's College, London in a quiz show. She is introduced around 2:51.

    https://youtu.be/DvQ73OTjQnU?t=172

    All I see are 8 IYIs. What’s interesting about that?

    Ms. Saini is no Sunny Leone.

  171. @Jack D
    Putting aside whether Kenyans really have them, it's clear from the animal world (and basic physics) that having long skinny legs is an advantage when it comes to running fast - see horses. You don't want a lot of weight to swing around down at the bottom while having long legs lengthens the amount of ground that you cover for each stroke. This is the same reason that the oars on racing shells are long and narrow.

    Over short distances, it may be that just being heavily muscled everywhere is better but over much longer distances the extra weight that more muscle bulk requires is going to tax your respiratory system.

    Over short distances, it may be that just being heavily muscled everywhere is better but over much longer distances the extra weight that more muscle bulk requires is going to tax your respiratory system.

    To first order, it’s all basic physics.

    For short distance, it’s all about power – the rate at which energy is expended – and how efficiently that power can be converted into acceleration. In a world class 100 meter sprint, the runners are still accelerating, at least a little, at the finish. Once you get past about 100 meters, the runners are no longer accelerating, but their ability to accelerate for the first half of the race is still paramount. As the distance increases, it starts becoming more and more about efficiency – e.g., minimizing parasitic losses in locomotion; the vast majority of the race is run at constant speed.

    So the sprinters need plenty of muscle, optimized for short bursts of power, and a skeletal architecture that can efficiently turn that power into force at the foot-ground contact point; good sprinters are heavily muscled and taller than average – although Usain Bolt is an anomaly; it takes a lot more power to swing those very long legs back and forth fast enough to win against somewhat shorter opponents. The distance runners need efficient cardiovascular systems and biomechanics that minimizes parasitic losses, which means light weight and long limbs for mechanical efficiency – but not too long, because longer legs have more mass, which increases parasitic losses.

  172. @Cowboy shaw
    The way she just swats aside Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending like they're irritating bloggers is quite something. She's not lacking in confidence.

    She wishes she did, her “confidence” is that of someone who is delusional, a delusion common in academia and the media. None of her arguments proceed beyond name calling and what Steve calls point and sputter.

  173. PSR says:

    What puzzles me about people like her is that she must understand that she is writing pure nonsense and merely propagandizing and even if 95 out of 100 people who read this believe her premise, she hasn’t affected reality, added anything to human understanding or science. Why wouldn’t she pursue something that might provide some true value and/or personal satisfaction?

    • Replies: @bomag

    Why wouldn’t she pursue something that might provide some true value and/or personal satisfaction?
     
    Such people get satisfaction from being part of a movement and repeating propaganda. Think cultists; Koran memorizers.
    , @SaneClownPosse
    She's part of a long term project.
    In her head she's helping to "save" the world.
    Telling lies is okay, if you are working to save the world. It helps that she believes the lies.

    Climate Change.
    Diversity is Strength.
    Non-binary genders.

    Lies to change the World for the Better by Next Tuesday.
  174. @Reg Cæsar

    Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism...
     
    ...is about as relevant as Glenn Gould's.



    Glenn Gould confessed to a reporter that he had indeed had gotten many tickets for running red lights. But he had also stopped at green lights more than once, and never got credit for that.

    Glenn vs Stephen Jay-- no contest.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eTZ33EVK3Ug

    Gould vs. Pretty much anybody–no contest.

    This performance of the Emperor Concerto in which Gould is not only the soloist but also co-conductor along with Karl Ancerl, is sublime.

  175. @Daniel H
    Never mind that a billion people could easily be housed in California alone, not even the nation's largest state by area, and it would still be less crowded than the Bronx. Jason Riley.


    How does one even reason with a moron like this.

    I really loathe libertarians. There is something really off about them.

    Notice he says housed and not fed.

  176. @Jack D
    Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of "reification" . According to Gould, proponents of IQ believed that IQ was a "thing" and not just a rating scale. The pressure in your circulatory system is a "thing" and you can measure it fairly directly. But IQ is not one single thing, therefore it does not exist at all, according to Gould.

    This is profoundly wrong. Let's take reading for example. You can test people on reading and conclude that individual X reads at the 2nd grade level or at the 5th percentile of his age group. There are numerous tests for this and they would all more or less agree as to X's grade level or percentile. However, these tests are all indirect - there is no reading gauge that you can wrap around someone's arm and determine reading ability as a number on a dial.

    The ability to read and write is not a "thing" or one thing. It is actually a combination of a whole bunch of different skills - ability to recognize shapes, to attach sounds to shapes, to combine sounds into words, to connect words into sentences, to gain meaning from a sentence, the motor control needed to form the letters on paper, etc. A deficiency in any one of these things would reduce your ability to read and write. Nevertheless, it's perfectly valid and scientific to say "X reads at the 2nd grade level." You can show X a newspaper or a novel or a comic book and if his reading score is low he's going to have difficulty reading any one of them.

    IQ is the exact same thing - it measures our ability to comprehend and process concepts in any field. It was invented when scientists noted that the same kids who did well in one subject in school tended to do well in ALL subjects and decided that there should be a way to figure out who these kids were and sum it all up in one number (or a few numbers). Again it works with great consistency - you can give someone the Wechsler test and then the Stanford-Binet test and they will usually agree to within a few points. You can give the same person these tests over a period of years and the numbers will remain fairly constant.

    Very well said Jack.

    This whole “IQ isn’t a real thing” or “IQ isn’t intelligence but …” is either stupid or dishonest.

    Sure, we’re often sloppy with our language, but no one is confused. IQ isn’t intelligence, it’s a measure of intelligence.

    Sure, it isn’t like height–or your example of blood pressure–because for those things the measurement is a pretty good handle on the thing itself. (Although even those move around a bit so you could say your blood pressure score isn’t really your “real” blood pressure.) Intelligence–and more generally the quality of functioning of our brains–is way more complex.

    But IQ is … “good enough” and certainly useful. It correlates really well with academic learning, with the ability to learn new stuff and do well in a vast swathe of occupations and generally with life outcomes. And that’s what matters.

    The objections that it isn’t really “intelligence” because “intelligence” is way to complex are true and utterly pointless. Lots of things are too complex to come up with simple measurement that captures all their complexity, but that doesn’t mean we can’t get a good handle on them. We don’t have a simple measurement for “cute” either, but–the Potter Stewart test–“i know it when i see it” is good enough. IQ is plenty good enough.

    • Replies: @anon
    Compare IQ or any test or measure of brain work to tests of "athletecism". There are lots of athletic skills and lots of measures of it. Running is a general test that is a good measure of athletic skill for all sports. Want to know if someone can hit a baseball, catch a football, do the breaststroke? Time them in the 100 meters. The fastest runners will also be more adept at anything else you throw at them. Not a perfect measure for every case, but a good general measure.
  177. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    The black Irish, never the brightest bunch.

  178. @PiltdownMan
    For those who are interested, Angela Saini was on a team, last Christmas, of four alumni representing King's College, London in a quiz show. She is introduced around 2:51.

    https://youtu.be/DvQ73OTjQnU?t=172

    The BBC somehow ended up with two men on the other team. Clearly they need to look more closely at future casting decisions. And Jeremy Paxman (host) will perhaps be the last straight, white man presenting this show?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    It's OK to have white men on if they play the role of predesignated loser. Washington Generals anyone?
  179. @Lurker
    The BBC somehow ended up with two men on the other team. Clearly they need to look more closely at future casting decisions. And Jeremy Paxman (host) will perhaps be the last straight, white man presenting this show?

    It’s OK to have white men on if they play the role of predesignated loser. Washington Generals anyone?

  180. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    She is not playing dumb, she just sees what she wants to, which the dominant ideology of our time. She never questions it.

  181. @Tiny Duck
    Well she's respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it

    Face it you guys lost

    Race doesn't exist

    Well she’s respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it

    The piers that be?

    Race doesn’t exist

    If race doesn’t exist then obviously racism can’t exist either.

  182. @trelane

    Angela Saini isn’t all that bright
     
    I noticed that too.

    Saini got bored identity at “lazy biological essentialism”.

    As Uncle Tucker would say :

    “What does that even mean?”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's about fat hookers waiting for clients to walk in in Parisian cafés?
  183. @Interested Bystander
    I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.” I tried to think of a more appropriate name for it, but the best I could come up with is “Social Construction.” I welcome other suggestion from the witty readers of this blog....

    I’m struck by the irony of her article appearing in a publication called “Nature.”

    Yeah, when did “Nature” become an anti-science leftist rag?

    A thing that constantly strikes is how mathematically silly various aspects of minoritarian ideology are.

    “Nation of immigrants”–i.e. immigration forever. Applying sixth grade math, either:
    — population increases and increases until you are crowded, shithole no one wants to come to or
    — the native populations genes are increasing replaced by incoming foreigners.
    (Note: i’m aware there are some other mathematically sound scenarios but the only one that’s at all palatable for natives is “Carribbean sugar planation”–you keep bringing immigrants in and work them to death. How wonderful! And obvious that’s not what these folks are talking about.)

    So just trivial math reveals “nation of immigrants” means either shitholecide or genocide.

    This whole “race doesn’t exist”, “all groups are the same under the skin” ideology is bizarre.

    We know race exists because we can see it. If we didn’t we wouldn’t be arguing about it. So what this argument is really about is all the non-apparent differences. Basically about differences in mental traits.

    Trivial math: if a trait varies between individuals–is not fixed in humans–then it varies between separate “population groups”.

    Take two races A + B and lets assume Saini is right and they have exactly the same distribution of various genes that produce variance in some trait–intelligence, conscientiousness, cooperative, extraversion, whatever. Now someone in group A dies…. now the races are different. Yes, trivially so, but different. How those differences will change over time–be trivial or substantial, i can’t say. It depends, of course, on selection. But if there are individual differences, then you’ll have group differences–math.

    Now the idea that selection, operating all these widely varying environments–geographically, climatically, agriculturally, civilizationally, technologically–produces exactly the same distribution of genetic traits for precisely our most salient, evolved survival adaptation–our big brained mental processing–is just … nuts! It contradicts ever principal of evoluntionary biology. Our evolved big brains are mankind’s survival bread and butter, precisely where you’d expect the most vigorous selection adapting to new/different environments.

    • Agree: bomag
  184. @George
    How One Kenyan Tribe Produces The World's Best Runners
    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2013/11/01/241895965/how-one-kenyan-tribe-produces-the-worlds-best-runners

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalenjin_people#Demographics

    Kalenjin speakers number 4,967,328 individuals. Kalenjin speaker seems like an artificial construct too.

    I heard about Kalenjine tribes (there are many). It’s amazing to see that 10% of Kenyan get 70% of their medals or 50% or worldwide medals.

    Kenyan without Kalenjine are 1 in 160 people worldwide .
    They get 1 in 4 medals for >1500m. The same as rest of the world, Kalenjine excepted.
    That’s 160 times better than rest of non Kenyan humans.

    Kalenjine represent 1 in 1600 people worldwide.
    They get 1 in 2 in the same categories.
    That’s 3200 better than rest of non Kenyan humans.

    Quite dramatic domination …

  185. @Anonymous
    I know it's not quite the same thing, but a pointer in the right direction - what about the unique genetic mutations that the indigenous Andean and Tibetan peoples have in the blood cell physiology which enable them to thrive in low oxygen levels?

    Such is the power of genetic sweeps and natural selection, over a time period which is trivial in evolutionary terms. Thus, in pre modern times, any physiological selection which gave a survival edge to a particular gene pool in a particular mode of life would be selected for.

    Just what is controversial about that?

    Such is the power of genetic sweeps and natural selection, over a time period which is trivial in evolutionary terms. Thus, in pre modern times, any physiological selection which gave a survival edge to a particular gene pool in a particular mode of life would be selected for.

    Just what is controversial about that?

    You’re spot on Anon[201]. There’s absolutely nothing controversial about selection at all.

    This entire “controversy” has absolutely nothing to do with any real scientific dispute at all.

    The dispute is entirely because some races do much better at “modern life” than other races … and explaining those differences in biological terms undermines a very successful line of minoritarian attack upon coherent white gentile nations.

    That’s it. There’s no actual controversy that merits the name “science”. It’s simply that science undermines minoritarianism … and that’s hersey!

    • Agree: jim jones
  186. @Tiny Duck
    Well she's respected by the piers that be so huh better get used to it

    Face it you guys lost

    Race doesn't exist

    Well in your case it’s certainly inconsistent as your sex.

  187. OT

    A lot of fairly bad news for Oberlin here (or good news, depending — “LOL”):

    Judge Orders Oberlin To Post $36 Million Bond Since It Refuses To Pay Defamed Bakery

  188. Athleticism is overrated.

    It is all panem & circenses over & over again. Clownish entertainment for stupid masses. Sorry, but that’s it. Sure, it generates enormous amounts of money, prestige, interenational blah blah, passions, jobs, products…. I’m not blind to its social impact.

    Just..

    It is only good to keep some, potentially lazy people in shape. Otherwise, it is completely useless.

    Name any professional athlete from ancient Greece.

    How many athletes can you name from past half a century, in comparison with truly creative & important people?

    If you know more athletes, all sports, than scientists & artists combined- well, you’re on the royal way to morondom. Good luck in idiocracy.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Lots of things are overrated, so what? Jim Thorpe is a well known athlete from over 100 years ago. Yankee Stadium was the "House that Ruth Built".


    What about popular music? What about movies, even lots of books? Most is just throw away trash. If life didn't have entertainment, of some sorts, then we wouldn't be much more than worker ants, bees or termites. Entertainment gives people useful distractions to socialize around.
    , @obwandiyag
    . . . besides it all being fixed and them all being on steroids.
  189. Actually, despite their presumed cultural advantages because they invented so many of the world’s leading sports, the British haven’t done all that well in global athletics in recent generations, until putting on a well-funded push at the 2012 London Olympics. And the big star was Mogadishu born Mo Farah, an East African.

    Britain has usually been pretty tough on use of performance enhancing drugs, a policy that has strong public support in Britain, and did not do well in the Olympics during the period of Eastern European domination of many events, which now is pretty much proved to have been drug fueled.

    In recent years funding from the National Lottery has made it possible for promising athletes to devote themselves full time to their sports while living well above unemployment benefit levels, leading to more success in Olympic events and more people adopting careers as Olympians.

    England has not won the soccer world cup since 1966, and would be ranked a lot lower in the world pecking order had it not benefited from immigration from the West Indies to top up the soccer-playing gene pools, and the England cricket team which recently won the World Cup of one day cricket, seems to be composed mostly of South African ringers.

    However, while Britain has been very dominant in cycling events over recent years, there has been a great deal of suspicion of drug cheating, or at least bending the rules, as it appears that most of the British cyclists are asthmatics. Just think what they could do if they had healthy lungs!

  190. Saini will be remembered. As scum.

  191. Saini is female and brown so we’re supposed to take her pronouncements seriously. Or else.

    So tiresome.

  192. That an author of East Indian heritage makes her bones in the UK lecturing European Brits and others on the evils of their racism is laughable. India is the most racist society on earth. Of course it is called the “caste” system. Funny though, the “better” castes are always whiter than the “lower” ones.

    But since this is based on millennia old superstition (religion) it can’t be termed racism. The Indian constitution has special clauses in parts of it which refer to special Affirmative Action to be awarded to those from the “backward classes.” These are specially defined minority ethnic groups, all of which are much darker than the ruling Brahmin castes.

    Now I’m not saying this author defends eons old Indian racism. I don’t know. But Indian racism is alive and well despite tepid “official” efforts to oppose it. Most Hindu Indians accept it as part of their belief system. At the very least it is curious that this author focuses on supposed sports racism when her entire national heritage is built on a religiously racist concept (excluding non Hindus, who are mostly powerless there.) Why exactly is “white racism” so persistent in a place where no actual Europeans have ruled (other than as occupiers) for thousands of years? It seems that would be a much more relevant subject for her to research than mere international sports writing.

    • Agree: SaneClownPosse
  193. “Who are you going to believe about life in Africa: Dr. Harpending or Angela D. Saini”

    Why—Angela D. Saini of course. After all, it’s who we are. Besides, it’s all “socially constructed”…or………something.

  194. @George
    A problem I see with your reasoning is that you are not talking about a race, you are talking about a familial group that is adapted to a certain sport. That familial group also manages to keep their numbers at least stable generation after generation.

    I think sports is well suited to familial dynasties, except it doesn't seem to happen much. But sports careers start and end much younger so there is more time to identify winners and have children.

    The Bernoulli family dynasty of geniuses went on for a while 1654-1935. But they don't seem to exist anymore. One of the last wikipedia entries is Elisabeth Bernoulli (1873-1935), suffragette and campaigner against alcoholism, which might explain some of the reason the Bernoullis are no longer. Fun fact: Fermat's Theorem slayer Andrew Wiles has 3 daughters, so maybe there will be a British math dynasty.

    There may be no easy way to maintain top tier intellectual dynasties, which means it would be hard to create a high IQ race.

    A familial group would be a subset of a race.

  195. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cowboy shaw
    The way she just swats aside Pinker, Plomin, Cochran, Harpending like they're irritating bloggers is quite something. She's not lacking in confidence.

    High caste Indians have more chutzpah than Jews.

  196. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jay Ritchie
    "Angela Saini isn’t all that bright"

    Having met Ms Saini I can confirm that she is extremely bright and has a proper and impressive scientific background (engineering rather than biology). My guess is that she doesn't really believe what she is writing. But hey, this stuff pays better than being a science journalist.

    I can confirm that she is extremely bright

    Possible but more likely that you are mistaken. Smart enough Indians are the best in the world pretending that they are much smarter than they actually are. Nothing in Saini’s background or career suggests that she is actually more than 120-125 points IQ smart (which is definitely not enough for being called “extremely bright”).

  197. @megabar
    > Has no one told Saini that Gould infamously faked his data in “debunking” Morton’s “racist” skull measurement study?

    Even more, Gould's book says little of importance, even if every fact in his book were true. IIRC, the book tried to establish the following:

    * Some intelligence researchers are/were biased, and sought to confirm their own belief that Europeans are the smartest race
    * Some early measurements of brain case size and other elements of physiognomy may have been incorrect and/or fudged
    * Early intelligence testing was flawed, and unfair to people with less cultural immersion as compared to NW European Americans.
    * Some conceptions of intelligence are wrong. For example, the idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the "engine" of intelligence is flawed, and falls in the face of certain statistical analyses.

    At best, this would cause you to ignore or look more critically at some lines of evidence. It does not come close to "debunking" the racial line of reasoning.

    idea that there is a single, physical element that serves as the “engine” of intelligence is flawed

    Yes, that engine is called “the brain”.

    • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
  198. @Anon
    I'm interested in reading this part of the book:

    Evans goes on to damn US psychologists more generally as giving a “faux-scientific gloss to unscientific assumptions”, particularly that IQ is a rigorous or reliable measure of intelligence.

    Research has shown that IQ testing still fails to capture the true complexity and variation in human intellect.
     
    So:

    1. Blacks only score lower on IQ because of racism. If that is removed, the score the same, as an adoption study shows. In fact, even after adoption black kids are subjected to racism based on their looks. So ultimately, they would be smarter than whites or anyone else but for the racism.

    2. However, even though blacks have a higher potential IQ than everyone else, it turns out that IQ is complete rubbish. It doesn't measure anything useful. What a bummer for blacks to have such a high potential IQ, and in the end it doesn't mean anything!

    3. But wait, there is something besides IQ, a metric called "human intellectual complexity and variation." Let's call it HICV. HICV is what really matters, and IQ doesn't capture it. The sources for the HICV concept ... uh ... like uh ... Gardner's multiple intelligences, EQ, learning styles, Myers-Briggs ... uh, get back to me on that.

    4. The point is, HICV is quality stuff, not dismal or shoddy like IQ research.

    5. And here's the thing: Black HICV is way higher than that of any other race (but race doesn't exist). It's not intelligence; it's intellect, in all of its complexity and variation, and blacks have loads of it. We're gonna have an HICV test finished and calibrated real soon now, so stay tuned.

    Blacks only score lower on IQ because of racism. If that is removed, the score the same

    Blacks in 100% black African nations are even lower IQ than blacks here. Empirically, white racism raises Black IQ.

  199. @Negrolphin Pool
    I don't know what study she is referring to by this Evans person. But she is likely talking about some version of Twin A being adopted into an affluent white Western family while Twin B is left to languish in a festering Nigerian slum. In that case, you can see IQ increases on the order of 12+ points. If this is the case and she wasn't an anti-scientific liar, she would emphasize that the difference is caused by removing the child from an extremely deprived and pernicious environment.

    If she is talking about something else, I'm betting the real difference lies in the researcher's willingness to use bad methodology or outright fraud.

    The study is a French one of cross-class adoption. They wanted 40 children, 10 each in 4 quadrants: 10 rich kids adopted by poor parents, 10 rich kids adopted by poor parent, 10 poor kids adopted by rich parents, 10 poor kids adopted by poor parents. They only achieved a sample size of n=38, but it remains a quite interesting study because most adoption studies don’t look at what screw-up parents do to their children. Adoption agencies try hard to find non-screw-up adoptive parents.

    They wound up finding that at age 14 IQ is 59% Nature and 41% Nurture. The sample size is very small, but the results seem pretty plausible to me.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The movie Three Identical Strangers involves an attempt by a [Jewish] adoption agency to do an experiment in the US on a set of identical triplets - they placed one with a "wealthy" family, one with a "middle class" family and one with a "working class" family. In reality the spread was not that great - the "working class" dad owned a small grocery store and the "rich" dad was a doctor but the poor guy was not that poor and the rich guy was not that rich. The "blue collar" family was the warmest and most welcoming and after the triplets were reunited that's where they all hung out. The whole experiment turned out to be a dud and only brought opprobrium down on the heads of those who conducted it for conducting a cruel experiment without consent.
  200. Anonymous[261] • Disclaimer says:
    @Flemur
    ‘science’

    'Angela Saini'

    Angela Saincy!

  201. @Steve Sailer
    The study is a French one of cross-class adoption. They wanted 40 children, 10 each in 4 quadrants: 10 rich kids adopted by poor parents, 10 rich kids adopted by poor parent, 10 poor kids adopted by rich parents, 10 poor kids adopted by poor parents. They only achieved a sample size of n=38, but it remains a quite interesting study because most adoption studies don't look at what screw-up parents do to their children. Adoption agencies try hard to find non-screw-up adoptive parents.

    They wound up finding that at age 14 IQ is 59% Nature and 41% Nurture. The sample size is very small, but the results seem pretty plausible to me.

    The movie Three Identical Strangers involves an attempt by a [Jewish] adoption agency to do an experiment in the US on a set of identical triplets – they placed one with a “wealthy” family, one with a “middle class” family and one with a “working class” family. In reality the spread was not that great – the “working class” dad owned a small grocery store and the “rich” dad was a doctor but the poor guy was not that poor and the rich guy was not that rich. The “blue collar” family was the warmest and most welcoming and after the triplets were reunited that’s where they all hung out. The whole experiment turned out to be a dud and only brought opprobrium down on the heads of those who conducted it for conducting a cruel experiment without consent.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    That was 1960. Today it would be easier to find families of vastly different means.
  202. Anonymous[261] • Disclaimer says:
    @bored identity
    Saini got bored identity at "lazy biological essentialism".


    As Uncle Tucker would say :

    "What does that even mean?"

    It’s about fat hookers waiting for clients to walk in in Parisian cafés?

    • LOL: BB753
    • Replies: @bored identity
    "Bonjour, I'm Madame De Beauvoir, and you must be my three o clock...now, why is shit-brooming still ever expanding occupation in World's Largest Democracy?"
  203. @Dieter Kief
    Oh, thanks for your hint at bgates' argument. Such are the ones that count, especially in public debates: Simple and on the point!

    Steve has another zinger well worth keeping in your quiver: he’s said that “race doesn’t exist” is like saying “hills don’t exist”.

    • Agree: Dieter Kief
  204. @Jack D
    The movie Three Identical Strangers involves an attempt by a [Jewish] adoption agency to do an experiment in the US on a set of identical triplets - they placed one with a "wealthy" family, one with a "middle class" family and one with a "working class" family. In reality the spread was not that great - the "working class" dad owned a small grocery store and the "rich" dad was a doctor but the poor guy was not that poor and the rich guy was not that rich. The "blue collar" family was the warmest and most welcoming and after the triplets were reunited that's where they all hung out. The whole experiment turned out to be a dud and only brought opprobrium down on the heads of those who conducted it for conducting a cruel experiment without consent.

    That was 1960. Today it would be easier to find families of vastly different means.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The supply of adoptable Jewish infants dwindled to zero (at least statistical zero) a long time ago. Louise Wise Agency closed its doors in 2004 and long before that it no longer had Jewish children to give away. I wonder in what year the last Jewish infant was given up for adoption in the US? So today they'd have a big spread of incomes but no babies to place.
  205. @guest
    You should look up the Lewontin Fallacy. It's about genetic differences. Supposedly most of the genetic variation occurs between individuals of the same race, and that variations you could use to distinguish one race from another are very small in comparison.

    It’s unlikely he would ask that question if he weren’t already familiar with “Lewontin’s Fallacy”. “Lewontin’s Fallacy” is literally unintelligible. It’s up to the reader to try to give it some meaning.

    This reader says there’s no reason to help Lewontin out with a charitable interpretation of his nonsense.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    It's perfectly intelligible. It's just a methodological error. Lewontin focused on single alleles and these contain very little data individually - if you give me the contents of a single allele I can't tell you what race you are. I might not even be able to tell you whether you are human or a chimp. It would be as if you told me that you liked fried chicken. This wouldn't prove that you are black - there are white people who like fried chicken and black people who don't (even then I could improve my odds above random). However, if you answer 10 questions about yourself or tell me the contents of as few as 10 alleles, then I could tell you your race with almost 100% certainty.
  206. @George
    A problem I see with your reasoning is that you are not talking about a race, you are talking about a familial group that is adapted to a certain sport. That familial group also manages to keep their numbers at least stable generation after generation.

    I think sports is well suited to familial dynasties, except it doesn't seem to happen much. But sports careers start and end much younger so there is more time to identify winners and have children.

    The Bernoulli family dynasty of geniuses went on for a while 1654-1935. But they don't seem to exist anymore. One of the last wikipedia entries is Elisabeth Bernoulli (1873-1935), suffragette and campaigner against alcoholism, which might explain some of the reason the Bernoullis are no longer. Fun fact: Fermat's Theorem slayer Andrew Wiles has 3 daughters, so maybe there will be a British math dynasty.

    There may be no easy way to maintain top tier intellectual dynasties, which means it would be hard to create a high IQ race.

    “it would be hard to create a high IQ race”

    Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and Ashkenazis beg to differ.

    If you’re talking about the highest levels, in Western societies there seems to be something about exceptional, one in a billion IQ which doesn’t make women queue up to have your babies.

    When the 6-year-old von Neumann caught his mother staring aimlessly, he asked her, “What are you calculating?”

    However, the Beijing Genomics Institute is trying to take the guesswork and romance out of high IQ families.

  207. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Couple of OT gems:


    16 Marines arrested for humans trafficking, names not immediately released:

    https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/16-marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-drug-charges/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20190725&tpcc=nypbreaking&mpweb=755-8130626-719864743

    Jason Riley in the WSJ: We Could Pack a Billion People into California, No Problem :

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/07/jason-riley-in-wsj-we-could-pack.html

    Well at least he associated Reagan (and the Bushes) with immigration stupidity. The funny thing is he tried to make it sound like stupidity is OK as long as Reagan believed in it.

  208. @International Jew
    That was 1960. Today it would be easier to find families of vastly different means.

    The supply of adoptable Jewish infants dwindled to zero (at least statistical zero) a long time ago. Louise Wise Agency closed its doors in 2004 and long before that it no longer had Jewish children to give away. I wonder in what year the last Jewish infant was given up for adoption in the US? So today they’d have a big spread of incomes but no babies to place.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Jewesses were pioneers in actually using birth control and in having abortions for convenience.
    I had the hots for a Jewish girl in high school. She was a champion swimmer and later became the weather girl on the leading tv station in that town for a decade. She was against abortion but said birth control was every woman's obligation.

    My dad firmly put the kibosh on that relationship, saying we weren't having any "christ killers" in the family (he was prejudiced, you know) but my mother did allow that if you had a Jewish girl at least she would probably not get pregnant until marriage. STL (and particularly West and South County) had a fair Jewish population and my mother plyed tennis and needlepointed with several, liked them. When she and my father would get into it she'd say something about wishing she'd married Nathan instead.

    In my later years I had lot of Japanese girls and a few other nonwhites, but no Blacks, and to my knowledge no jews. I don't find most Jewish girls physically attractive. I've never understood why anyone would have the hots for, say, Susanna Hoffs.

    My dad did have a fling with Susan Sontag once, and another Jewish girl who is still alive and sort of famous (her sister is quite famous) but I didn't know that at the time I was in high school.
  209. @Abolish_public_education

    While 100m dash Olympians tend to be extremely muscular, the Kenyans who do well in track tend to be extremely slender.
     
    Long distance runners (endurance athletes) train by running long distances (burning lots of calories). Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass (carbo-loading helps to top-off the fuel tank, immediately before a race).

    Sprinters win with explosive (muscle) power. They do weight training, vertical jumping (plyometrics) etc. to supplement the intrinsic, power building nature of their sport. They like to eat foods rich in protein.

    Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass

    Every sporting event has it’s own optimal body type with very little variation around that desired mean at the top. Look at distance runners low weight and wiry. You cannot carry a lot of weight for long distances and win. It isn’t about eating enough it is about carrying useless weight mile after mile. Look at cycling. Does anybody see anybody looking like an NFL linebacker? Those powerful leg muscles might make a difference in a 200 meter bike sprint but be dead weight in a 120 mile leg of the Tour de France.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Look at cycling. Does anybody see anybody looking like an NFL linebacker? Those powerful leg muscles might make a difference in a 200 meter bike sprint but be dead weight in a 120 mile leg of the Tour de France.
     
    Lance Armstrong talks about exactly this in his book. He credits the (Steroid-fueled?) cancer and subsequent recovery for reshaping his body into a form that enabled all his (drug-fueled!) Tour de France wins.
  210. @Jack D
    Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of "reification" . According to Gould, proponents of IQ believed that IQ was a "thing" and not just a rating scale. The pressure in your circulatory system is a "thing" and you can measure it fairly directly. But IQ is not one single thing, therefore it does not exist at all, according to Gould.

    This is profoundly wrong. Let's take reading for example. You can test people on reading and conclude that individual X reads at the 2nd grade level or at the 5th percentile of his age group. There are numerous tests for this and they would all more or less agree as to X's grade level or percentile. However, these tests are all indirect - there is no reading gauge that you can wrap around someone's arm and determine reading ability as a number on a dial.

    The ability to read and write is not a "thing" or one thing. It is actually a combination of a whole bunch of different skills - ability to recognize shapes, to attach sounds to shapes, to combine sounds into words, to connect words into sentences, to gain meaning from a sentence, the motor control needed to form the letters on paper, etc. A deficiency in any one of these things would reduce your ability to read and write. Nevertheless, it's perfectly valid and scientific to say "X reads at the 2nd grade level." You can show X a newspaper or a novel or a comic book and if his reading score is low he's going to have difficulty reading any one of them.

    IQ is the exact same thing - it measures our ability to comprehend and process concepts in any field. It was invented when scientists noted that the same kids who did well in one subject in school tended to do well in ALL subjects and decided that there should be a way to figure out who these kids were and sum it all up in one number (or a few numbers). Again it works with great consistency - you can give someone the Wechsler test and then the Stanford-Binet test and they will usually agree to within a few points. You can give the same person these tests over a period of years and the numbers will remain fairly constant.

    > Gould was particularly hung up on the concept of “reification”

    Yeah, reification was one of many, many new words I learned whilst reading MoM. Mr. Gould certainly had an excellent vocabulary. I’ve forgotten most of the words, but reification stuck through sheer repetition.

    Gould also argued that a single source of intellect was not indicated by test results. A person could be good at math, but a so-so reader. Another person could be the opposite. Thus, it is unlikely that humans are entirely governed by one “intellect engine.” And in fact, that’s likely true.

    But it’s just a straw man stand-in for the actual argument, which doesn’t particularly care if useful intelligence is a single or cluster of traits. I kept waiting for Gould to explain how his attack on the straw man bore on the real argument, but he never did.

  211. There have been studies that have NOTICED the biological angle regarding the differences in black and white athletes.

    https://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html

    We also know that environment plays an integral role as well. Kenya has won an astonishing 63 medals at the Olympic Games in races of 800m and above (21 gold!), since 1968. It turns out it is not Kenya as a whole that usually emerged victorious, but individuals from a region in the Rift Valley called Nandi. So context matters here, since an argument could be made that distance running is a Nandi phenomenon. The success of “black” distance running is concentrated in a decidedly small area, with the vast majority of the continent under-represented.

    
When it comes to the sprints, why has Africa not dominated? The combined forces of several nations (e.g. Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Togo, Niger, Benin, Mali, the Gambia, Ghana, Gabon, Senegal) have not won a single sprinting medal (to my knowledge) at the Olympics or World Championships; rather, it has been the Jamaicans and the Americans.

    Just because some black people are good (or bad) at something does not imply that black people in general will be good (or bad) at something. Training, funding, and past success ALL play a role here.

    Is there not far more genetic variation WITHIN than BETWEEN racial groups?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Besides the US and Jamaica there have been other sprinters from Caribbean islands and west Africa that have been successful world class sprinters. The problem for places other than Jamaica and the US is those places don't have a national program like Jamaica has. Supposedly, Bolden has been training with the national team since he was 14 years old. Americans have high school, college, and a first world economy to develop in.


    When you get to the very top, that extra training ability is what really separates the medal winners from the guys who just barely make it to the finals.
    , @gcochran
    When the average of some trait differs between two groups, the fraction of the higher group exceeding a high threshold can be very much larger. This can go so far that single families from the high-average group can, at the highest level, out-compete whole nations.
  212. @ben tillman
    It's unlikely he would ask that question if he weren't already familiar with "Lewontin's Fallacy". "Lewontin's Fallacy" is literally unintelligible. It's up to the reader to try to give it some meaning.

    This reader says there's no reason to help Lewontin out with a charitable interpretation of his nonsense.

    It’s perfectly intelligible. It’s just a methodological error. Lewontin focused on single alleles and these contain very little data individually – if you give me the contents of a single allele I can’t tell you what race you are. I might not even be able to tell you whether you are human or a chimp. It would be as if you told me that you liked fried chicken. This wouldn’t prove that you are black – there are white people who like fried chicken and black people who don’t (even then I could improve my odds above random). However, if you answer 10 questions about yourself or tell me the contents of as few as 10 alleles, then I could tell you your race with almost 100% certainty.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    It’s perfectly intelligible.
     
    No, it's not. You're using parol evidence to try to lend it some meaning, but standing alone it literally means nothing.

    "The mean proportion of the total species diversity that is contained within populations is 85.4%.... Less than 15%of all human genetic diversity is accounted for by differences between human groups!"
     
    "Genetic diversity" doesn't mean anything, nor does "total species diversity".
    , @ben tillman
    None of that has anything to do with what Lewontin said. It sounds like Edwards, perhaps, but it's utterly non-responsive to my comment.
  213. @Anon
    A "proper" scientific background has to include the core science pillar of the research statistics class that teaches one how to read, critique, and theoretically conduct science. This class generally is offered in graduate science programs, starting at the Masters level.

    It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn't have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does. At least technically speaking. Where you would want to go from there in terms of critiquing someone's discipline-specific credentials is a matter of personal opinion.

    If taught how to read research (for a scientist, which always implies a process of simultaneous critique), an individual is generally equipped to muddle through cross-discipline research if they understand the vocabulary.

    However, what is true is that modern education generally affords little to no cross-discipline knowledge. Which means that someone with an engineering degree is as about as knowledge-equipped as a janitor to comment on genetics. If an engineer has a Master of Science degree or greater, then they will at least be able to critique general research conclusions for ignored variables and contradicting evidence that might render the research as lower quality evidence.

    That's about where the value of a "proper science credentials" begins and ends in terms of cross-discipline critique.

    > It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn’t have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does.

    With respect, this does not at all follow. It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree. Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.

    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn’t. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.

    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn’t hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence. This works in both directions. Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.

    • Replies: @Anon

    With respect, this does not at all follow.
     
    With respect, it does.

    It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree.
     
    Possible, but rare enough to be inconsequential to assuming someone's qualification. Simply, rare people work through graduate level textbooks that they are not assigned (assuming they knew which to source to begin with).

    Also the concept of formal qualification, which is what is under discussion, is defined by third party (University) assessment and award of that qualification. By definition.

    If we are not referring to the concept of qualification in terms of formal qualification, then the discussion is meaningless because all actual (informal) qualification would then be unknown. My aforementioned janitor could write for Nature and we would then have to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is a "qualified" autodidact.


    Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.
     
    Given that you are a fan of logic, you would have to agree it follows that this would then hold true for any profession. Given that asserted truth, I still would trust a medical doctor at the bottom of his class over someone who worked through the medical curriculum in their spare time. The former has a formal qualification, which is a real qualification, and the latter does not. The probability for personal medical success with the former is still greater. The probability for accurate, meaningful statements in regard to science from someone with credentials is greater.

    In any credible program, one isn't admitted without the innate ability to understand the concepts and one doesn't graduate without demonstrating that understanding.


    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn’t. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.
     
    "..always attained", by definition. No one stated that "strong research skills" were required to understand how to read and critique science. What was variously stated and implied was the need for a base level understanding of how to do so.

    This base level understanding is almost strictly gained through certain training, with the help of a professor who has been trained in and can teach those skills.

    I get the impression that you are using your intuition to conceptualize the nature of learning science critique (how to read science), and underestimating it. What I'm telling you is that the process and what is learned isn't easily conceptualized without formal training.


    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn’t hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence.
     
    What evidence is that, on both counts?

    This works in both directions.
     
    What works in which directions?

    Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.
     
    Credentials absolutely lend a baseline level of credibility over someone without.

    Credentialed individuals can conduct bad science, falsify data, and draw poor conclusions: either willfully and as a matter of intellectual failing. However, the peer review process is theoretically meant to be a fail safe to prevent poorly conducted, poorly written, or willfully corrupt science.

    In practice, it works in most hard science fields most of the time. In practice, it has been completely corrupted for politically sensitive disciplines: which casts science in general in a bad light.

    None of this is a mandate for further reversion to assigning equal weight to the voice of individuals without formal training. That's a slippery slope that neither science nor society should want entertained.

  214. Given that Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of biological determinism The Mismeasure of Man was published in 1981 — almost 40 years ago — you might think it’s no longer necessary to reassert that there is no genetic basis for what people think of as race.

    So this silly woman of color thinks that Gould’s decades-old political screed is state of the art science.

    And she gets published pretty much wherever she wants to be.

  215. @Reg Cæsar

    Are those figures for Kenyan men & women combined or men only?
     
    The only man-and-woman-combined that comes to mind is Caster Semenya. That's too small a sample size. And not Kenyan.

    To clarify: Are Kenyan women also good at long distances like Kenyan men?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Yes.
  216. @newrouter
    To clarify: Are Kenyan women also good at long distances like Kenyan men?

    Yes.

  217. @PSR
    What puzzles me about people like her is that she must understand that she is writing pure nonsense and merely propagandizing and even if 95 out of 100 people who read this believe her premise, she hasn’t affected reality, added anything to human understanding or science. Why wouldn’t she pursue something that might provide some true value and/or personal satisfaction?

    Why wouldn’t she pursue something that might provide some true value and/or personal satisfaction?

    Such people get satisfaction from being part of a movement and repeating propaganda. Think cultists; Koran memorizers.

  218. @Jack D
    It's perfectly intelligible. It's just a methodological error. Lewontin focused on single alleles and these contain very little data individually - if you give me the contents of a single allele I can't tell you what race you are. I might not even be able to tell you whether you are human or a chimp. It would be as if you told me that you liked fried chicken. This wouldn't prove that you are black - there are white people who like fried chicken and black people who don't (even then I could improve my odds above random). However, if you answer 10 questions about yourself or tell me the contents of as few as 10 alleles, then I could tell you your race with almost 100% certainty.

    It’s perfectly intelligible.

    No, it’s not. You’re using parol evidence to try to lend it some meaning, but standing alone it literally means nothing.

    “The mean proportion of the total species diversity that is contained within populations is 85.4%…. Less than 15%of all human genetic diversity is accounted for by differences between human groups!”

    “Genetic diversity” doesn’t mean anything, nor does “total species diversity”.

  219. @Jack D
    It's perfectly intelligible. It's just a methodological error. Lewontin focused on single alleles and these contain very little data individually - if you give me the contents of a single allele I can't tell you what race you are. I might not even be able to tell you whether you are human or a chimp. It would be as if you told me that you liked fried chicken. This wouldn't prove that you are black - there are white people who like fried chicken and black people who don't (even then I could improve my odds above random). However, if you answer 10 questions about yourself or tell me the contents of as few as 10 alleles, then I could tell you your race with almost 100% certainty.

    None of that has anything to do with what Lewontin said. It sounds like Edwards, perhaps, but it’s utterly non-responsive to my comment.

  220. @Corvinus
    There have been studies that have NOTICED the biological angle regarding the differences in black and white athletes.

    https://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html

    We also know that environment plays an integral role as well. Kenya has won an astonishing 63 medals at the Olympic Games in races of 800m and above (21 gold!), since 1968. It turns out it is not Kenya as a whole that usually emerged victorious, but individuals from a region in the Rift Valley called Nandi. So context matters here, since an argument could be made that distance running is a Nandi phenomenon. The success of “black” distance running is concentrated in a decidedly small area, with the vast majority of the continent under-represented.

    
When it comes to the sprints, why has Africa not dominated? The combined forces of several nations (e.g. Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Togo, Niger, Benin, Mali, the Gambia, Ghana, Gabon, Senegal) have not won a single sprinting medal (to my knowledge) at the Olympics or World Championships; rather, it has been the Jamaicans and the Americans.

    Just because some black people are good (or bad) at something does not imply that black people in general will be good (or bad) at something. Training, funding, and past success ALL play a role here.

    Is there not far more genetic variation WITHIN than BETWEEN racial groups?

    Besides the US and Jamaica there have been other sprinters from Caribbean islands and west Africa that have been successful world class sprinters. The problem for places other than Jamaica and the US is those places don’t have a national program like Jamaica has. Supposedly, Bolden has been training with the national team since he was 14 years old. Americans have high school, college, and a first world economy to develop in.

    When you get to the very top, that extra training ability is what really separates the medal winners from the guys who just barely make it to the finals.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    West Africa has produced a lot of sprinters under 10 seconds, but not as many going very low.
  221. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    The supply of adoptable Jewish infants dwindled to zero (at least statistical zero) a long time ago. Louise Wise Agency closed its doors in 2004 and long before that it no longer had Jewish children to give away. I wonder in what year the last Jewish infant was given up for adoption in the US? So today they'd have a big spread of incomes but no babies to place.

    Jewesses were pioneers in actually using birth control and in having abortions for convenience.
    I had the hots for a Jewish girl in high school. She was a champion swimmer and later became the weather girl on the leading tv station in that town for a decade. She was against abortion but said birth control was every woman’s obligation.

    My dad firmly put the kibosh on that relationship, saying we weren’t having any “christ killers” in the family (he was prejudiced, you know) but my mother did allow that if you had a Jewish girl at least she would probably not get pregnant until marriage. STL (and particularly West and South County) had a fair Jewish population and my mother plyed tennis and needlepointed with several, liked them. When she and my father would get into it she’d say something about wishing she’d married Nathan instead.

    In my later years I had lot of Japanese girls and a few other nonwhites, but no Blacks, and to my knowledge no jews. I don’t find most Jewish girls physically attractive. I’ve never understood why anyone would have the hots for, say, Susanna Hoffs.

    My dad did have a fling with Susan Sontag once, and another Jewish girl who is still alive and sort of famous (her sister is quite famous) but I didn’t know that at the time I was in high school.

  222. Anon[575] • Disclaimer says:
    @megabar
    > It follows that without at least a Masters of Science degree in some discipline, one doesn’t have a proper science background. With it (or greater), one does.

    With respect, this does not at all follow. It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree. Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.

    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn't. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.

    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn't hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence. This works in both directions. Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.

    With respect, this does not at all follow.

    With respect, it does.

    It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree.

    Possible, but rare enough to be inconsequential to assuming someone’s qualification. Simply, rare people work through graduate level textbooks that they are not assigned (assuming they knew which to source to begin with).

    Also the concept of formal qualification, which is what is under discussion, is defined by third party (University) assessment and award of that qualification. By definition.

    If we are not referring to the concept of qualification in terms of formal qualification, then the discussion is meaningless because all actual (informal) qualification would then be unknown. My aforementioned janitor could write for Nature and we would then have to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is a “qualified” autodidact.

    Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.

    Given that you are a fan of logic, you would have to agree it follows that this would then hold true for any profession. Given that asserted truth, I still would trust a medical doctor at the bottom of his class over someone who worked through the medical curriculum in their spare time. The former has a formal qualification, which is a real qualification, and the latter does not. The probability for personal medical success with the former is still greater. The probability for accurate, meaningful statements in regard to science from someone with credentials is greater.

    In any credible program, one isn’t admitted without the innate ability to understand the concepts and one doesn’t graduate without demonstrating that understanding.

    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn’t. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.

    “..always attained”, by definition. No one stated that “strong research skills” were required to understand how to read and critique science. What was variously stated and implied was the need for a base level understanding of how to do so.

    This base level understanding is almost strictly gained through certain training, with the help of a professor who has been trained in and can teach those skills.

    I get the impression that you are using your intuition to conceptualize the nature of learning science critique (how to read science), and underestimating it. What I’m telling you is that the process and what is learned isn’t easily conceptualized without formal training.

    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn’t hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence.

    What evidence is that, on both counts?

    This works in both directions.

    What works in which directions?

    Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.

    Credentials absolutely lend a baseline level of credibility over someone without.

    Credentialed individuals can conduct bad science, falsify data, and draw poor conclusions: either willfully and as a matter of intellectual failing. However, the peer review process is theoretically meant to be a fail safe to prevent poorly conducted, poorly written, or willfully corrupt science.

    In practice, it works in most hard science fields most of the time. In practice, it has been completely corrupted for politically sensitive disciplines: which casts science in general in a bad light.

    None of this is a mandate for further reversion to assigning equal weight to the voice of individuals without formal training. That’s a slippery slope that neither science nor society should want entertained.

    • Agree: lavoisier
    • Replies: @megabar
    My guess is that in reality, we agree more than disagree, but the nature of internet forums obscures that, what with baileys being tossed around.

    For example, I said that credentialism is almost worthless, when in reality it's obvious that your average postdoc understands the scientific process better than the average Joe. You state that all graduates of credible schools have attained research skills, by definition, but it's obvious that some people graduate with little real competence, because graduating is a proxy for, but not the same as, being able to independently produce value.

    So let me retreat to my motte, and assert that:
    1. A certificate is not a guarantee of competence or correctness, even in the trained domain
    2. The lack of a certificate is not a guarantee of incompetence or incorrectness, even in the relevant domain
    3. A certificate is not a valid argument. It is a hint that suggests that the holder is more likely to be able to form a valid argument.

    Point #2 is more or less true depending on the field. In your example, medicine, there is no way to gain experience without formal training. So, yes, I would never trust anyone but a licensed surgeon to operate on me. But that is not true for learning how to evaluate research findings, which is what this discussion is about.

    In particular, I cringe when people use credentials as an argument, because it allows echo chambers to rise. Academia, with its peer-review system, is inherently prone to positive reinforcement without an external correction. In hard sciences, reality is that external correction. In the arts and softer sciences, the public _can_ serve as external correction, but that ceases to be when non-domain-experts are simply dismissed as incapable of commenting.

    Indeed, one of the reasons that I dislike credentialism is that I believe it hastens the departure from an effective and truthful field. If academics are the only ones allowed to comment on academics....

    > I get the impression that you are using your intuition to conceptualize the nature of learning science critique (how to read science), and underestimating it.

    I have a graduate degree and have published.

    > However, the peer review process is theoretically meant to be a fail safe to prevent poorly conducted, poorly written, or willfully corrupt science.

    Yes. But it does not always work. Witness the replication crisis.

    > None of this is a mandate for further reversion to assigning equal weight to the voice of individuals without formal training.

    I disagree with this, or at least a particular reading of it. Imagine that you read a paper that competently put forth a good argument. By good, I mean a fundamentally good argument; not a superficial one. Does it matter what credentials the author has? It shouldn't.

    You can argue that it is _more likely_ that such a paper would be written by someone with training. I would agree with that. But that's not the argument I think we're having.
  223. @Dave Pinsen
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1154944166008414209?s=21

    Hats off sir, thank you.

  224. @MarkinLA
    Besides the US and Jamaica there have been other sprinters from Caribbean islands and west Africa that have been successful world class sprinters. The problem for places other than Jamaica and the US is those places don't have a national program like Jamaica has. Supposedly, Bolden has been training with the national team since he was 14 years old. Americans have high school, college, and a first world economy to develop in.


    When you get to the very top, that extra training ability is what really separates the medal winners from the guys who just barely make it to the finals.

    West Africa has produced a lot of sprinters under 10 seconds, but not as many going very low.

  225. @Corvinus
    There have been studies that have NOTICED the biological angle regarding the differences in black and white athletes.

    https://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html

    We also know that environment plays an integral role as well. Kenya has won an astonishing 63 medals at the Olympic Games in races of 800m and above (21 gold!), since 1968. It turns out it is not Kenya as a whole that usually emerged victorious, but individuals from a region in the Rift Valley called Nandi. So context matters here, since an argument could be made that distance running is a Nandi phenomenon. The success of “black” distance running is concentrated in a decidedly small area, with the vast majority of the continent under-represented.

    
When it comes to the sprints, why has Africa not dominated? The combined forces of several nations (e.g. Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Togo, Niger, Benin, Mali, the Gambia, Ghana, Gabon, Senegal) have not won a single sprinting medal (to my knowledge) at the Olympics or World Championships; rather, it has been the Jamaicans and the Americans.

    Just because some black people are good (or bad) at something does not imply that black people in general will be good (or bad) at something. Training, funding, and past success ALL play a role here.

    Is there not far more genetic variation WITHIN than BETWEEN racial groups?

    When the average of some trait differs between two groups, the fraction of the higher group exceeding a high threshold can be very much larger. This can go so far that single families from the high-average group can, at the highest level, out-compete whole nations.

    • Agree: BB753
  226. @MarkinLA
    Such runners can never eat enough to build bulky muscle mass


    Every sporting event has it's own optimal body type with very little variation around that desired mean at the top. Look at distance runners low weight and wiry. You cannot carry a lot of weight for long distances and win. It isn't about eating enough it is about carrying useless weight mile after mile. Look at cycling. Does anybody see anybody looking like an NFL linebacker? Those powerful leg muscles might make a difference in a 200 meter bike sprint but be dead weight in a 120 mile leg of the Tour de France.

    Look at cycling. Does anybody see anybody looking like an NFL linebacker? Those powerful leg muscles might make a difference in a 200 meter bike sprint but be dead weight in a 120 mile leg of the Tour de France.

    Lance Armstrong talks about exactly this in his book. He credits the (Steroid-fueled?) cancer and subsequent recovery for reshaping his body into a form that enabled all his (drug-fueled!) Tour de France wins.

  227. @AndrewR
    In January in Chicago the temperature ranges from -25°F to 65°F. The mean temperature in January is 25°F and the mean temperature in July is 70°F. Since intra-month variation is greater than inter-month variation, seasons don't exist, racist.

    That's literally how these people think.

    BTW, don’t bother using that example with these people in order to demonstrate the fallacy of their beliefs. I’ve used a simile like that proving that mountain ranges don’t exist.
    They simply lack the logical faculties to follow it, think you’re trying to confuse them with some Jedi mind trick, get very irritated, and change the subject. You may as well try to explain a calculus problem to a Golden Retriever.

  228. Old stuff…

    Obsession with (collective) IQ is weird. Evidently, a functioning modern civilization or human collective has not much to do with bare IQ.

    Well known examples:

    Mongolia- IQ 101

    Lithuania- IQ 91

    And Mongolia is, compared to Lithuania, a dump.

    American blacks or African Americans- IQ 85

    India- IQ 82

    While there are numerous Indian top physicists, mathematicians, engineers, excellent schools, … no such thing among blacks.

    The test questions are overrated & most people simply conflate various types of intelligence, talent, inquisitiveness, critical thinking & general education.

    A few examples from history.

    No one could say that philosophers like Hegel, Schopenhauer or Heidegger were not “intelligent” (whatever this may mean), but they’d been science illiterates, clueless about basic workings of the universe- and, more, just didn’t care. Their type of abstract thinking was not aligned with mathematical ability, let alone anything like curiosity about physical universe. And hardly anyone could claim they were not original, critical, highly abstract…thinkers.

    Theirs was a different type of intellect. I think that neuroimagining in past few years has shown that mathematicians’ brains, when solving problems, work basically with numbers (whichever the level of abstraction), while other types of highly concentrated brain activity are more evenly spread across brain (or this area is not yet fully explored?). Perhaps something to do with words? Dunno..
    https://www.livescience.com/54370-math-brain-network-discovered.html (this is partially wrong since Einstein was not a great mathematician, nor was his thinking “mathematical”, to be nitpicking)

    https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/232765-this-is-your-brain-on-physics

    Or, great mathematicians like Galois or Alexander Grothendieck were not particularly interested (gifted?) in physics & their ideas about human life, politics, society …. were frequently obscurantist or absurd. Simply- dumb.
    Also, some great physicists were not particularly “bright” re mathematics (or numerous other fields)- Faraday; Einstein, as a mathematician, is not so great. He was one of the greatest physicists; his mathematical ability was not stellar by any account.

    If we are to consider important life-sciences achievers (Aristotle, Darwin, Mendel, Watson,..) we can see again that their contributions do not show any kind of spectacular mental ability re math & physics or that they would have scored very high at IQ tests.

    So, a rather trivial conclusion would be: 1. various types of talent & inquisitive mind (mathematics, life sciences, astronomy, physics, philosophy, …) sometimes do intersect- but mostly they do not, these are worlds apart, 2. having said that all, critical thinking is a completely different issue & contrary to most expectations, it has nothing to do with high achieving-even at genius level- in any particular area.

    To put it simply: blacks are irredeemably aggressive, destructive & of low cognitive ability. We all know this. We don’t need tests. We don’t need a single test. We just have to look at the world from US to Brazil to Haiti to Zambia to Nigeria and SA.

  229. @Steve Sailer
    I always assumed "Stand on Zanzibar," which was a famous sci-fi novel when I was in high school, was about humans fighting off an alien invasion by making their last stand on Zanzibar.

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

    Well, if it’s a last stand …

    It was a pretty good novel as I recall, at least if you’re in a dystopian mood.

  230. O dear. Saini refers to “The Mismeasure of Man” by Gould. That book has been thoroughly debunked.

    https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    Saini and her ilk don't believe he has, just like they refused to believe Boas work regarding head size and the environment has been debunked either. In both cases the response has complete denial, Both Boas and Gould's view have become sacrosanct among leftist social scientists.
  231. @Negrolphin Pool
    I also like Z Man's version: The best team in baseball has a batting average of .286 while the worst team has an average of .230. But the differences between players within the best team's roster are massively larger, running from .333 to .102.

    Therefore, it is ableist pseudoscience to think that the best team in baseball is "better at hitting" than the worst team.

    How can someone with a .102 batting average stay in the major leagues?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Not for long, but if he is a catcher with the arm of a Johnny Bench and hits 40 home runs, you might give him a lot more time on the roster.
  232. @Dieter Kief
    Angela Saini is bright (and good looking, hehe) enough to succeed. As long as you play (= suppose/argue) that sloppy, she will dominate your game. Handle this case like Steve Sailer does it - once again in a quite brilliant manner: Don't underestimate Angela Saini.

    It’s merely an evaluation of category. The best strategy depends on what she actually is/believes. Each one calls for a different set of tactics.

  233. @petit bourgeois
    Don't forget that one of the greatest sumo wrestlers of all time was a Hawaiian: Akebono.

    https://youtu.be/Yt580N7TmFQ

    At 6'-8" and 551 pounds he was formidable in his prime.

    Chadwick Haheo Rowan aka Akebono Tarō was a giant.

    Aren’t native Hawai’ians really Maori who sailed off course? 😉

    Aren’t contemporary Hawai’ians a mulatto, a mixed race people of Anglo-Saxons, native Hawai’ians and Jappos?

  234. @Anon

    With respect, this does not at all follow.
     
    With respect, it does.

    It is entirely possible to learn how to apply the scientific method, and its associated analysis tools, outside of a graduate degree.
     
    Possible, but rare enough to be inconsequential to assuming someone's qualification. Simply, rare people work through graduate level textbooks that they are not assigned (assuming they knew which to source to begin with).

    Also the concept of formal qualification, which is what is under discussion, is defined by third party (University) assessment and award of that qualification. By definition.

    If we are not referring to the concept of qualification in terms of formal qualification, then the discussion is meaningless because all actual (informal) qualification would then be unknown. My aforementioned janitor could write for Nature and we would then have to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is a "qualified" autodidact.


    Further, it is entirely possible to complete such a degree without really understanding the concepts.
     
    Given that you are a fan of logic, you would have to agree it follows that this would then hold true for any profession. Given that asserted truth, I still would trust a medical doctor at the bottom of his class over someone who worked through the medical curriculum in their spare time. The former has a formal qualification, which is a real qualification, and the latter does not. The probability for personal medical success with the former is still greater. The probability for accurate, meaningful statements in regard to science from someone with credentials is greater.

    In any credible program, one isn't admitted without the innate ability to understand the concepts and one doesn't graduate without demonstrating that understanding.


    I have no problem using a credential as a shortcut to guess how qualified a person is or isn’t. I also fully admit that a person needs some group experience to develop strong research skills, which is most commonly obtained in an academic setting. No doubt, a graduate degree holder is more likely to have the proper skills.
     
    "..always attained", by definition. No one stated that "strong research skills" were required to understand how to read and critique science. What was variously stated and implied was the need for a base level understanding of how to do so.

    This base level understanding is almost strictly gained through certain training, with the help of a professor who has been trained in and can teach those skills.

    I get the impression that you are using your intuition to conceptualize the nature of learning science critique (how to read science), and underestimating it. What I'm telling you is that the process and what is learned isn't easily conceptualized without formal training.


    But when evidence suggests that this shortcut doesn’t hold up, the correct approach is to ignore the shortcut, and pay attention to the more specific evidence.
     
    What evidence is that, on both counts?

    This works in both directions.
     
    What works in which directions?

    Thus, using a credential as an argument is not a very good argument.
     
    Credentials absolutely lend a baseline level of credibility over someone without.

    Credentialed individuals can conduct bad science, falsify data, and draw poor conclusions: either willfully and as a matter of intellectual failing. However, the peer review process is theoretically meant to be a fail safe to prevent poorly conducted, poorly written, or willfully corrupt science.

    In practice, it works in most hard science fields most of the time. In practice, it has been completely corrupted for politically sensitive disciplines: which casts science in general in a bad light.

    None of this is a mandate for further reversion to assigning equal weight to the voice of individuals without formal training. That's a slippery slope that neither science nor society should want entertained.

    My guess is that in reality, we agree more than disagree, but the nature of internet forums obscures that, what with baileys being tossed around.

    For example, I said that credentialism is almost worthless, when in reality it’s obvious that your average postdoc understands the scientific process better than the average Joe. You state that all graduates of credible schools have attained research skills, by definition, but it’s obvious that some people graduate with little real competence, because graduating is a proxy for, but not the same as, being able to independently produce value.

    So let me retreat to my motte, and assert that:
    1. A certificate is not a guarantee of competence or correctness, even in the trained domain
    2. The lack of a certificate is not a guarantee of incompetence or incorrectness, even in the relevant domain
    3. A certificate is not a valid argument. It is a hint that suggests that the holder is more likely to be able to form a valid argument.

    Point #2 is more or less true depending on the field. In your example, medicine, there is no way to gain experience without formal training. So, yes, I would never trust anyone but a licensed surgeon to operate on me. But that is not true for learning how to evaluate research findings, which is what this discussion is about.

    In particular, I cringe when people use credentials as an argument, because it allows echo chambers to rise. Academia, with its peer-review system, is inherently prone to positive reinforcement without an external correction. In hard sciences, reality is that external correction. In the arts and softer sciences, the public _can_ serve as external correction, but that ceases to be when non-domain-experts are simply dismissed as incapable of commenting.

    Indeed, one of the reasons that I dislike credentialism is that I believe it hastens the departure from an effective and truthful field. If academics are the only ones allowed to comment on academics….

    > I get the impression that you are using your intuition to conceptualize the nature of learning science critique (how to read science), and underestimating it.

    I have a graduate degree and have published.

    > However, the peer review process is theoretically meant to be a fail safe to prevent poorly conducted, poorly written, or willfully corrupt science.

    Yes. But it does not always work. Witness the replication crisis.

    > None of this is a mandate for further reversion to assigning equal weight to the voice of individuals without formal training.

    I disagree with this, or at least a particular reading of it. Imagine that you read a paper that competently put forth a good argument. By good, I mean a fundamentally good argument; not a superficial one. Does it matter what credentials the author has? It shouldn’t.

    You can argue that it is _more likely_ that such a paper would be written by someone with training. I would agree with that. But that’s not the argument I think we’re having.

  235. @Anonymous
    It's about fat hookers waiting for clients to walk in in Parisian cafés?

    “Bonjour, I’m Madame De Beauvoir, and you must be my three o clock…now, why is shit-brooming still ever expanding occupation in World’s Largest Democracy?”

  236. @AndrewR
    In January in Chicago the temperature ranges from -25°F to 65°F. The mean temperature in January is 25°F and the mean temperature in July is 70°F. Since intra-month variation is greater than inter-month variation, seasons don't exist, racist.

    That's literally how these people think.

    Not that your point is mistaken, but your analogy is the opposite of the the point you’re trying to make.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    How? Just about anywhere on Earth, at least outside of the Arctic, the temperature difference between the coldest and warmest months is less than the variation in temperature that can happen in a single month.
  237. @confused
    Could someone please explain, or give a reference to, what is exactly is meant by: "more variation within groups than between groups". Does it mean for instance, that if you look at the bell curves for a particular trait in two groups, the standard deviations of the bell curves are larger than the difference between the means? Thanks in advance.

    Thank you for posting the question. The replies are excellent.

    Pseudo science using words strung together to obfuscate a lack of logic and evidence.

  238. @PSR
    What puzzles me about people like her is that she must understand that she is writing pure nonsense and merely propagandizing and even if 95 out of 100 people who read this believe her premise, she hasn’t affected reality, added anything to human understanding or science. Why wouldn’t she pursue something that might provide some true value and/or personal satisfaction?

    She’s part of a long term project.
    In her head she’s helping to “save” the world.
    Telling lies is okay, if you are working to save the world. It helps that she believes the lies.

    Climate Change.
    Diversity is Strength.
    Non-binary genders.

    Lies to change the World for the Better by Next Tuesday.

  239. @Kronos
    It’s trivial, but is there any indication that Angela Saini is:

    1) actually retarded

    2) in denial

    3) just playing stupid

    Her work is published because the people who control the discourse want her work to be published.

    Nothing more than that.

    For her part she is a moron.

  240. @backup
    O dear. Saini refers to "The Mismeasure of Man" by Gould. That book has been thoroughly debunked.

    https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

    Saini and her ilk don’t believe he has, just like they refused to believe Boas work regarding head size and the environment has been debunked either. In both cases the response has complete denial, Both Boas and Gould’s view have become sacrosanct among leftist social scientists.

  241. @obwandiyag
    Lemme get this straight. So the black guy from Kenya is a different race from the black guy from Jamaica.

    You guys shore is schmart.

    So let me get this straight…white people from Norway and white people from Greece are not interchangeable? Huh-whaaaa?

  242. @Triumph104
    Exactly. Within these countries most runners come from the same tribe, such as the Kalenjin in Kenya and the Arsi in Ethiopia. The men on Kenya's 2016 Olympic rugby team were the size American football tight ends and defintely not Kalenjin.

    About 75% of Kenya’s best runners come from just 1 of the country’s 40 tribes, the Kalenjin, who comprise approximately 10% of the total Kenyan population. Furthermore, many of Kenya’s best runners come from a subtribe of the Kalenjin known as the Nandi, who comprise only about 3% of the total Kenyan population. ... A similar altitude-based geographical residence is seen among the Ethiopian runners, who come primarily from the Arsi tribal region and secondarily from the Shewa tribal region. Both the Arsis and Shewas have lived for centuries in the highlands of the Great Rift Valley, which extends northward from Kenya into southern and central Ethiopia.

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/517e/9d33f5fee8e519b9225bd47cd4b1de7f905a.pdf
     

    Very interesting.

  243. @Bardon Kaldian
    Athleticism is overrated.

    It is all panem & circenses over & over again. Clownish entertainment for stupid masses. Sorry, but that's it. Sure, it generates enormous amounts of money, prestige, interenational blah blah, passions, jobs, products.... I'm not blind to its social impact.

    Just..

    It is only good to keep some, potentially lazy people in shape. Otherwise, it is completely useless.

    Name any professional athlete from ancient Greece.

    How many athletes can you name from past half a century, in comparison with truly creative & important people?

    If you know more athletes, all sports, than scientists & artists combined- well, you're on the royal way to morondom. Good luck in idiocracy.

    Lots of things are overrated, so what? Jim Thorpe is a well known athlete from over 100 years ago. Yankee Stadium was the “House that Ruth Built”.

    What about popular music? What about movies, even lots of books? Most is just throw away trash. If life didn’t have entertainment, of some sorts, then we wouldn’t be much more than worker ants, bees or termites. Entertainment gives people useful distractions to socialize around.

  244. @AndrewR
    How can someone with a .102 batting average stay in the major leagues?

    Not for long, but if he is a catcher with the arm of a Johnny Bench and hits 40 home runs, you might give him a lot more time on the roster.

  245. @Steve Sailer
    I always assumed "Stand on Zanzibar," which was a famous sci-fi novel when I was in high school, was about humans fighting off an alien invasion by making their last stand on Zanzibar.

    But I also had doubts about the wisdom of making your last stand on a small, flat island that the British conquered in a 40 minutes war in the 19th Century.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar#Title

    The primary engine of the novel’s story is overpopulation and its projected consequences.[2] The title refers to an early twentieth-century claim that the world’s population could fit onto the Isle of Wight—which has an area of 381 square kilometres (147 sq mi)—if they were all standing upright. Brunner remarked that the growing world population now required a larger island; the 3.5 billion people living in 1968 could stand together on the Isle of Man (area 572 square kilometres (221 sq mi)), while the 7 billion people who he (correctly) projected would be alive in 2010 would need to stand on Zanzibar (area 1,554 square kilometres (600 sq mi)).[4] Throughout the book, the image of the entire human race standing shoulder-to-shoulder on a small island is a metaphor for a crowded world.

    The World And Its People (1935)

  246. @kaganovitch
    Not that your point is mistaken, but your analogy is the opposite of the the point you're trying to make.

    How? Just about anywhere on Earth, at least outside of the Arctic, the temperature difference between the coldest and warmest months is less than the variation in temperature that can happen in a single month.

  247. @Bardon Kaldian
    Athleticism is overrated.

    It is all panem & circenses over & over again. Clownish entertainment for stupid masses. Sorry, but that's it. Sure, it generates enormous amounts of money, prestige, interenational blah blah, passions, jobs, products.... I'm not blind to its social impact.

    Just..

    It is only good to keep some, potentially lazy people in shape. Otherwise, it is completely useless.

    Name any professional athlete from ancient Greece.

    How many athletes can you name from past half a century, in comparison with truly creative & important people?

    If you know more athletes, all sports, than scientists & artists combined- well, you're on the royal way to morondom. Good luck in idiocracy.

    . . . besides it all being fixed and them all being on steroids.

  248. @AndrewR
    In January in Chicago the temperature ranges from -25°F to 65°F. The mean temperature in January is 25°F and the mean temperature in July is 70°F. Since intra-month variation is greater than inter-month variation, seasons don't exist, racist.

    That's literally how these people think.

    Argument by analogy is odious. You are wrong. Genetics is not temperature. Your kind of “logic” is commonly known as fatuous, or more benignly, sophomoric.

  249. • Replies: @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/SwipeWright/status/1124406797916409856
  250. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/SwipeWright/status/1154732026135756800

    https://twitter.com/SwipeWright/status/1154737666828713984

  251. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad
    Very well said Jack.

    This whole "IQ isn't a real thing" or "IQ isn't intelligence but ..." is either stupid or dishonest.

    Sure, we're often sloppy with our language, but no one is confused. IQ isn't intelligence, it's a measure of intelligence.

    Sure, it isn't like height--or your example of blood pressure--because for those things the measurement is a pretty good handle on the thing itself. (Although even those move around a bit so you could say your blood pressure score isn't really your "real" blood pressure.) Intelligence--and more generally the quality of functioning of our brains--is way more complex.

    But IQ is ... "good enough" and certainly useful. It correlates really well with academic learning, with the ability to learn new stuff and do well in a vast swathe of occupations and generally with life outcomes. And that's what matters.

    The objections that it isn't really "intelligence" because "intelligence" is way to complex are true and utterly pointless. Lots of things are too complex to come up with simple measurement that captures all their complexity, but that doesn't mean we can't get a good handle on them. We don't have a simple measurement for "cute" either, but--the Potter Stewart test--"i know it when i see it" is good enough. IQ is plenty good enough.

    Compare IQ or any test or measure of brain work to tests of “athletecism”. There are lots of athletic skills and lots of measures of it. Running is a general test that is a good measure of athletic skill for all sports. Want to know if someone can hit a baseball, catch a football, do the breaststroke? Time them in the 100 meters. The fastest runners will also be more adept at anything else you throw at them. Not a perfect measure for every case, but a good general measure.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?