The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
How Long Until They Come for Darwin?
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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Charles Darwin has been kept sacrosanct during the Great Awokening because his On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life is about plants and animals rather than about humans and thus is a stick in the eye to Christian creationists. But … a dozen years later in 1871, Darwin applied his “favoured races” logic to humans in The Descent of Man, and the Woke are gearing up to cancel that book on its 150th anniversary.

After all, we now know that race doesn’t exist.

From DW in Germany:

What Darwin’s ‘Descent of Man’ got wrong on sex and race — and why it matters

The authors of a book marking the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s “Descent of Man” discuss “a most interesting problem” — namely how the naturalist’s fundamental misconceptions on sex and race still shape society.

A Most Interesting Problem — What Darwin’s Descent of Man got Right and Wrong about Human Evolution is published by Princeton University Press (2021).

… But let’s take a punt here and suggest that far fewer of us have heard of Darwin’s later work, The Descent of Man.

Published 150 years ago this February 24, the book explores, among other things, Darwin’s theory of sexual selection — a process which he believed was a “complementary force to evolutionary change,” as science historian Janet Browne states in A Most Interesting Problem.

Browne wrote the introduction to the new book that discusses what The Descent of Man “got right and wrong about human evolution.” …

“Darwin proposed that sexual selection was instrumental in explaining the origin of what he called human ‘races’ and cultural progress,” writes Browne.

He argued that sexual selection explained why humans had broken off into different racial groups. Skin color and hair were important indicators. But according to Darwin, writes Browne, “sexual selection among humans would also affect mental traits such as intelligence and maternal love […] .”

And that even within the racial groups. Darwin wrote: “Man is more courageous, pugnacious, and energetic than woman, and has more inventive genius.”

But what did Darwin ever invent?

“I believe that Darwin truly was trying to explain the biological roots of the historical development of civilization,” wrote Browne in an email to DW. “He thought sexual selection was an important factor in the development of the human mind as well.” But, Browne concedes, one is “not alone in finding [Darwin’s thoughts] problematic.” …

“Origin of Species was just spectacular,” says Jeremy DeSilva, an anthropologist at Dartmouth College and editor of A Most Interesting Problem. “But then reading Descent of Man, I found myself in two minds.”

On the one hand, DeSilva told DW, Darwin had “incredible insight” about how humans were connected to other organisms and that we were all part of a grand process — “That every organism has an evolutionary story and so do we. He was onto something, and he set the stage for the next century or more of research.”

And then on the flipside, says DeSilva, “I would read these chapters about race and sex differences and just cringe. Wow was he off. And why was he so off? Was he simply a product of his time? Or did he just have these deep biases as a privileged British man [in the Victorian colonial era]?”

The problem is that Darwin could have done better at the time. He could have known better. “He had the data to do it, it’s not like he couldn’t go against the tide of the times,” says DeSilva. “I mean, he wrote Origin of Species!”

But sometimes Darwin just couldn’t see what was in front of his eyes. …

Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. After Descent of Man, Brown Blackwell wrote a book called The Sexes Throughout Nature, which explores ideas of equality, and she sent copies to Darwin.

“He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”

Holly Dunsworth, an anthropologist at the University of Rhode Island also contributed to A Most Interesting Problem. She answers DeSilva’s question rather plainly: It was “men and patriarchal traditions” that prevented female scientists from cutting through in Darwin’s time.

Reading A Most Interesting Problem, you get the feeling that Darwin may have struggled with an inner conflict — a conflict between his observations, his biases and those of the times. And then it seems he simply ignored his own science.

Darwin discusses “whether or not the so-called ‘races’ of humans were derived from different ancestors (the belief of polygenists) or whether they shared a distant common ancestor (monogenists),” writes Agustin Fuentes, an anthropologist at Princeton University.

“He clearly lay out a reputation of the biological division of people into lineages, and then he gives some cultural biased assertion about… ‘Yeah, yeah, there is all that, but we know that these people are not as advanced, they’re not as smart and they can’t survive,'” Fuentes told DW. “So, for me, it really shows how racism works. It’s not about the individual racist, it’s the systemic structures of belief that perpetuate these things.”

And those systemic beliefs, says Fuentes, have lasted until today. That’s true of attitudes towards indigenous populations of Australia or the United States, and perhaps more broadly, inequalities in the pandemic we’re all living through now.

“Take as examples the US and UK, where we see radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that. It’s the product of systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives,” says Fuentes.

“It is exactly what Darwin was seeing and misconstruing as evidence for natural selection, when what we’re really seeing is local, social and ecological landscapes creating cultural divisions which are embodied by people,” he says.

There is a sense of fairness towards Darwin in A Most Interesting Problem, but at the same time a good portion of anger.

The book’s editor, Jeremy DeSilva, says that “knowing what we know today,” Darwin would have written differently.

Fuentes says that Darwin would have “championed the lack of biological ‘races’ [today].”

But Holly Dunsworth is less forgiving.

“He could do better today because he would benefit from all the rest of us who are doing better than he was!” wrote Dunsworth in an email to DW.

“One of the threads in the book is to [think] about the delight Darwin might take in knowing what we know today. But I’m not comfortable or interested in imagining such personal things about him and that’s maybe because I’m angry with him and don’t want to give him a part of me,” says Dunsworth.

“Darwin was wealthy and connected. His ideas, if published now, would be heard, and anthropologists and many others would be putting out fires everywhere,” writes Dunsworth, who goes on to mention a stream of social media storms and names, such as (in)famous intellectuals like Steven Pinker and Richard Dawkins and “politicians who still compare opponents of color to nonhuman primates and all kinds of people with all kinds of power who think women and men evolved separately to have patriarchy’s stereotyped gender roles in order to advance the species, etc., etc.,…”

 
Hide 150 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. It’s the product of systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives,” says Fuentes.

    No, it’s the inevitable product of mass migration of low skilled people. The first generation feels great but then the subsequent generations grow up at the bottom, not because anyone puts them there but because the very mass migration that birthed them creates the conditions for it.

    The same thing happens in places with as varying social tolerances for ingroup preference as Sweden, Russia, the USA, South Africa, Korea etc.

    These problems only get exacerbated in the modern era by the very same neoliberalism which embraces low skilled immigration which makes lack of education more and more of an economic hobbling.

    The immigrants got what they wanted, they wanted the natives to acquiesce to their presence and let them work in their labour market, they did. Is the same economic standing among the same socio-economic strata from the native groups also racism?

  2. Well, Darwin was wrong, we’re obviously devolving, not evolving.

    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/amanda-gorman-poem-translation-dutch-b1808315.html

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Dumbo

    Ahahahahhah.... The epic Battle of Queeringrad.


    Dutch writer Marieke Lucas Rijneveld has stepped down from an assignment to translate Amanda Gorman’s work.

    Rijneveld, who won the International Booker Prize in 2020 with their novel The Discomfort of Evening, shared their decision on Friday on social media.
     

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

    Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their "boyishness". Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.

    Replies: @International Jew, @Intensifier

    , @Altai
    @Dumbo

    Oh my god, she's an 'Enby' and looks faintly autistic. And makes zero effort to present as anything other than female despite her protestations. And rather than embrace her as an ally, they smell blood and weakness and punish her for her wokeness for being a 'boring' red haired Dutch woman. It's just resentment towards white people in the abstract, nothing is ever good enough.

    Rijneveld is said to have developed an interest in writing in primary school after reading J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, which they borrowed from the local library. Because in Reformed circles references to magic are considered taboo, Rijneveld copied out the whole book onto their computer so they could re-read it upon returning the novel. Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their "boyishness". Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.
     

    Well, at least she they wrote another book. And basically let the bullies win by embracing a male/female identity in order to be 'correct'.

    A problem I have with narcissists from these extreme religious orders is the same as Germans and drunks with similar traits. They fail to understand the whole world isn't their closed community or that nationalism in other countries never became the Third Reich or that most people don't have a problem with drinking. They assume others must secretly have these problems or reasons they feel insecure but they have bravely conquered them.

    Replies: @anon

    , @Gordo
    @Dumbo


    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:
     
    Who reads that crap anyway?
  3. These people’s lack of self awareness is fascinating. In reality, they’re the 21st century equivalent of the outraged Victorian clerics and schoolmarms who railed against Darwin and his theory of evolution. But they don’t doubt for a moment that they’re on the side of science against ignorance, prejudice and “privilege”.

    • Agree: reiner Tor, ic1000, mc23, res
    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Rob McX

    > These people’s lack of self awareness is fascinating.

    Quote from actual journalist Michael Powell's NYT article (iSteve's Open Season on Townies post).

    “It’s a feature of elite academic institutions that faculty and students don’t recognize what it means to be elite,” said Smith College prof Marc Lendler.

    , @Prester John
    @Rob McX

    What gets me is that this crowd operates under the assumption that Darwin "got it wrong" when, given what we actually know with certainty (or, perhaps more accurately, DON'T know), is very much up for grabs.

    , @Desiderius
    @Rob McX

    If those were your selves you wouldn’t risk awareness either. Seems the more pressing question is why we let them dominate us.

    , @Unladen Swallow
    @Rob McX

    Interesting that the piece denounces Dawkins and Pinker as (in)famous, all the anti-Trump bromides from both doesn't protect them from their fellow PC driven academics.

  4. It’s a difficult one for the woke, isn’t it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their “God created all men equal” palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things and in his pre 21st-century innocence actually admitting that he had noticed things.

    Toughy!

    They will probably solve it by concluding that his ideas on evolution were in fact stolen from a collective of cave-dwelling pansexual womyn in Botswana whereas his nasty thoughtcrime about male creativity was of course purely Europen in origin and hey presto all will be well.

    • Agree: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Anon
    @Intensifier


    It’s a difficult one for the woke, isn’t it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their “God created all men equal” palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things
     

    What is motivating the, as you call them, “woke”? How do you reconcile these two campaigns of theirs?

    Replies: @Chensley

    , @Spangel123
    @Intensifier

    That's barely an exaggeration. John Leguizamo's Tony award winning "Latin history for Morons" (on netflix) actually expounds the theory that the founding fathers stole all their ideas (constitutional democracy etc) from the Iroquois. Much like how hannah nikole jones believes america's wealth was fundamentally built by black. basically all the good ideas of western civ were stolen from non whites, who were then not given credit and exploited by whites, whose main idea is how to oppress other people and maintain power over them.

  5. …the new book that discusses what The Descent of Man “got right and wrong about human evolution.”

    These are holy people.

    Writing a holy book.

    They have all possible knowledge.

    Only remaining task for them is to vigorously quash dissent.

  6. I’m not going to post or name inappropriate material but there’s an adult relaxation vid in which a fully clothed woman recites a monologue to a camera* to the effect that, presupposing modern concepts of consent,** the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, as what men exist are what men were desired and bred into existence by women. She reads a passage from a textbook in support of this, but it’s effectively just a definition.
    There is so much stuff out there that can’t be posted but is often wierdly relevant or funny, in part because of an explosion of independent production, in part because all of mainstream entertainment has imploded into Teletubbies Teach You To Love Big Brother.

    *That’s what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style, and if that sounds wierd you might be part of the generation wrecking the country.

    **Shhhh. Don’t tell her. Her version is prettier. Thanks to Democrat rule we’ll be back to hair-dragging soon enough. Let ’em all go to hell except Cave Twenty-Three.

    • Thanks: cronkitsche
    • LOL: Forbes
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @J.Ross


    * That’s what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style
     
    You only say that because the Attenborough-style is ubiquitus. Your contention is like saying that a commentary on sport is better than watching the Olympics.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    , @Alden
    @J.Ross

    More tales from the probation department. When I was a probation officer many of the thugs were 19-25 still living wit mamma. And Dey Mammas were active in their criminal cases.

    I noticed that black women do raise their sons to be aggressive and dangerous. They brag about it. School teachers notice this too. Even well paid affirmative action blacks encourage their sons to be aggressive. Some say it’s because black neighborhoods are so dangerous it’s the best way to survive. Especially in a no husband culture.

    It’s an interesting idea.

  7. Trained midwits marinating in their smugness. TMMSs.

    But, TMMS concedes, one is “not alone in finding [Darwin’s thoughts] problematic.” …

    Finding someone’s thoughts “problematic”? Talk to your doctor about this.

    I would read these chapters about race and sex differences and just cringe. Wow was he off. And why was he so off?

    No, TMMS. You are of. Like bad Yoghurt.

    Also, the “my deep feelz exposition” style of scientific inquiry is really grating.

    But I’m not comfortable or interested in imagining such personal things about him and that’s maybe because I’m angry with him and don’t want to give him a part of me,” says TMMS.

    Nobody cares what you do with your parts, especially not a dead man.

    “Origin of Species was just spectacular,” says TMMS, “But then reading Descent of Man, I found myself in two minds.”

    Schizophrenia can be healed!

    The book’s editor, Jeremy DeSilva, says that “knowing what we know today,” Darwin would have written differently.

    He would probably have advocated for strict apartheid instead of being publicly quite unhappy about Jamaican slavery and brutal suppression of rebellions.

    These people all need a good punch in the face.

  8. Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. After Descent of Man, Brown Blackwell wrote a book called The Sexes Throughout Nature, which explores ideas of equality, and she sent copies to Darwin.

    “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”

    Holly Dunsworth, an anthropologist at the University of Rhode Island also contributed to A Most Interesting Problem. She answers DeSilva’s question rather plainly: It was “men and patriarchal traditions” that prevented female scientists from cutting through in Darwin’s time.

    Dilemma: 1) the Patriarchy squelched women’s legitimate attempts at accomplishment. 2) Pioneering women accomplished so much! Even back in Darwin’s time.

    • Replies: @martin_2
    @Polistra

    That's exactly what I thought with respect to all these alleged black scientists and inventors that come up when you google "American scientist". If blacks were so oppressed and denied education how come all the scientists and inventors were black?

  9. a stick in the eye to Christian creationists.

    For once, a legit opportunity to use the phrase “Judeo-Christian”.

    Because it’s definitely the ‘Old Testament’ they’re relying upon.

  10. anon[358] • Disclaimer says:

    They will never get to Darwin. The mob couldn’t possibly take the time or effort to actually read his books. Or have the ability. Someone would have to deconstruct it into tweets.

    And they can’t get him fired or de-platformed.

    Plus there are still lots of creationists out there. He’s useful for that.

    • Replies: @Old and Grumpy
    @anon

    Darwin is a white man, so there's that reason to cancel. However I don't think team cancel can afford to ditch his myth of the out of Africa. Now there is a way they can have both: a creation of make believe black African mistress of Darwin's. She told him the unwritten history, and he appropriated it.

    , @Forbes
    @anon


    The mob couldn’t possibly take the time or effort to actually read his books.
     
    That's not an obstacle to woke-prog-left book banning. Usually one quote or word, even out of context, is sufficient.
  11. In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world & …. the Darwin problem solved.

    • Thanks: Intensifier
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Bardon Kaldian

    It will be much harder to right the wrongs done by wokeness than those done by communism.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @frontier
    @Bardon Kaldian


    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world
     
    Do you have a link or citation? I'm serious, I'd like to figure out which collapse is going to happen first - of wokeness or of most of the world? I wouldn't bet on the former.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    No it won't. It's here to stay, and it's in your face, until you remove it.

    , @Alt Right Moderate
    @Bardon Kaldian

    It's likely to break first in those western countries where the economy isn't strong enough to support a large number of woke parasites. Which is one of the reasons why anti-woke politicians are gaining more support in central and southern Europe.

    Unfortunately, economic wealth in the richer parts of the West is so high that the economy can support plenty of woke hangers on. Hence, the policy of appeasement from most rich white economic elites in the US and Northern Europe.

  12. @Dumbo
    Well, Darwin was wrong, we're obviously devolving, not evolving.

    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/amanda-gorman-poem-translation-dutch-b1808315.html

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Altai, @Gordo

    Ahahahahhah…. The epic Battle of Queeringrad.

    Dutch writer Marieke Lucas Rijneveld has stepped down from an assignment to translate Amanda Gorman’s work.

    Rijneveld, who won the International Booker Prize in 2020 with their novel The Discomfort of Evening, shared their decision on Friday on social media.

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

    Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their “boyishness”. Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Let's take the extra little step of allowing only blacks to also read her poetry, and it's all good.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Intensifier
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The self-referential narcissism drips from them.

    As if anyone gives a sh!t how many identifications she has.

  13. Anon[491] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intensifier
    It's a difficult one for the woke, isn't it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their "God created all men equal" palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things and in his pre 21st-century innocence actually admitting that he had noticed things.

    Toughy!

    They will probably solve it by concluding that his ideas on evolution were in fact stolen from a collective of cave-dwelling pansexual womyn in Botswana whereas his nasty thoughtcrime about male creativity was of course purely Europen in origin and hey presto all will be well.

    Replies: @Anon, @Spangel123

    It’s a difficult one for the woke, isn’t it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their “God created all men equal” palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things

    What is motivating the, as you call them, “woke”? How do you reconcile these two campaigns of theirs?

    • Replies: @Chensley
    @Anon


    What is motivating the, as you call them, “woke”? How do you reconcile these two campaigns of theirs?
     
    The motivation is that they will use any and all tools available to them regardless if it shows them as inconsistent. It's about winning and they'll do whatever it takes. This seems strange to people that try to be logical and consistent in their thoughts and actions, but once you understand that these people are cut from an entirely different cloth than you, then things start to make sense.

    The opponents of SJWs/wokes ought to become more Schmittian in their thought and start acting on the very real friend-enemy distinction that is intrinsic to politics. By that I mean that they need to make the lives of these people such a living hell that they leave and never set foot on the same territory or even think about retaliating.
  14. Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. (…) “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”

    According to Emily Poast he should have used “Esteemed salutations, my good bitch!”

    • LOL: Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @BB753
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Whatever happened with St. Paul's teachings that women should remain silent, veiled, and submissive in church?
    https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm

    Replies: @Alden, @anon

    , @nokangaroos
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying "you know what you can do with that crap"
    (though in somewhat more Victorian - flowery - prose); Marx got one of these also -
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    - Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked -
    shocked I tell you - his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches - like the
    Europids currently - to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    ... but the rest is too cogent to be left standing - this is not who we are :P

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anon, @James N. Kennett, @RonaldB

    , @mousey
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I don't know. I kind of like Darwin's ironic salutation in lieu of your sarcasm. Either one is pretty good but Darwin's is clever and more subtle (irony usually is) and seems to still be confounding the over educated today.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    , @Alden
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    If DeSilva were as educated as it claims it it is; it would know that there were many women authors in Darwin’s time.

    Close down every university and college in the country. Engineers and scientists can have the old fashioned 19th century polytechnics and mechanics institutes. Drs can skip the ridiculous BA bullshit requirement and go directly to a 5 year MD program as is done UK and Ireland. Nurses can go back to the 3 year program.

    And employers can start training their employees to the specific skills needed as is still done in Germany, one of the foremost economic powerhouses of the world.

  15. radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that

    Well, maybe a single reason…

    SPANISH STUDY FINDS VITAMIN D ‘REDUCES COVID-19 DEATHS BY 60%’

    https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2021/02/15/spanish-study-finds-vitamin-d-reduces-covid-19-deaths-by-60/

    • Replies: @Chensley
    @Jon



    radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that
     

     

    Well, maybe a single reason…
     
    They set up this false dichotomy that there has to be a single genetic cause for all those problems otherwise that hypothesis must be wrong. It's an extremely intellectually dishonest thing to do.

    It makes me wonder if any IQ studies have been done on egalitarians vs. HBDers.
  16. Notice of Intent to Publish a Funding Opportunity Announcement for Understanding and Addressing the Impact of Structural Racism and Discrimination on Minority Health and Health Disparities

    https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-MD-21-016.html

    “Only the dead have seen the end of war.”

    Not the ongoing and intensifying war on Western Civilization.

  17. I think Darwin might be the wall against which the idiot identity politics brain dead scum finally crash. He’s too much the foundation of all that lefty loons hold dear. They might try but if they cancel Darwin the light bulb will finally go off and these idiots will be left with no underpants. Let us hope and pray they cancel Darwin.

  18. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. (…) “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”
     
    According to Emily Poast he should have used “Esteemed salutations, my good bitch!”

    Replies: @BB753, @nokangaroos, @mousey, @Alden

    Whatever happened with St. Paul’s teachings that women should remain silent, veiled, and submissive in church?
    https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm

    • Replies: @Alden
    @BB753

    Pussy whipped nerds submissive to bullying shrew wives often quote St Paul. It’s a well known pattern.

    Replies: @BB753

    , @anon
    @BB753

    Antioinette Blackwell was a Congregationalist. Most of those churches eventually wound up as Unitarian. She went to Oberlin which apparently was a weak spot 150 years ago.

    Replies: @BB753

  19. I put it this way: A lot of people support the Theory of Evolution quite loudly, but not its actual occurrence.
    Man is just another monkey living in nature, but anything he does that someone doesn’t like is “unnatural”.

  20. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. (…) “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”
     
    According to Emily Poast he should have used “Esteemed salutations, my good bitch!”

    Replies: @BB753, @nokangaroos, @mousey, @Alden

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying “you know what you can do with that crap”
    (though in somewhat more Victorian – flowery – prose); Marx got one of these also –
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    – Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked –
    shocked I tell you – his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches – like the
    Europids currently – to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    … but the rest is too cogent to be left standing – this is not who we are 😛

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @nokangaroos

    Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians whom Darwin met on the Beagle's voyage are left these days.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Jonathan Mason

    , @anon
    @nokangaroos


    any species that switches – like the
    Europids currently – to exclusive intraspecific selection
     
    What do you mean by this?
    , @James N. Kennett
    @nokangaroos


    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying “you know what you can do with that crap”
    (though in somewhat more Victorian – flowery – prose); Marx got one of these also –
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.
     
    This is a more likely explanation for the "Dear Sir". It is doubtful that Darwin himself wrote the letter, though he might have signed it. It is even less likely that he read the book.
    , @RonaldB
    @nokangaroos

    You got it. While sexual selection can play some role in adaptation, environmental presses also play an independent role. A Scandinavian unable to cooperate with his fellows in the winter would not simply be unable to pass his seed to a willing female; he would freeze or starve to death or be caste out from the group as a useless mouth to feed.

    Given Darwin's breadth of exploration on species differences, I would not take the word of emotional partisans that Darwin used sexual selection as the mechanism to explain all racial or group differences. In fact, modern research has given a plethora of environmental presses resulting in different racial characteristics, such as the ability to absorb vitamin D. Ed Dutton, the Jolly Heretic, can humorously take phony, emotional "science" reporters apart when they substitute their emotional states for scientific findings. ccccc

  21. @Dumbo
    Well, Darwin was wrong, we're obviously devolving, not evolving.

    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/amanda-gorman-poem-translation-dutch-b1808315.html

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Altai, @Gordo

    Oh my god, she’s an ‘Enby’ and looks faintly autistic. And makes zero effort to present as anything other than female despite her protestations. And rather than embrace her as an ally, they smell blood and weakness and punish her for her wokeness for being a ‘boring’ red haired Dutch woman. It’s just resentment towards white people in the abstract, nothing is ever good enough.

    Rijneveld is said to have developed an interest in writing in primary school after reading J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, which they borrowed from the local library. Because in Reformed circles references to magic are considered taboo, Rijneveld copied out the whole book onto their computer so they could re-read it upon returning the novel. Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their “boyishness”. Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.

    Well, at least she they wrote another book. And basically let the bullies win by embracing a male/female identity in order to be ‘correct’.

    A problem I have with narcissists from these extreme religious orders is the same as Germans and drunks with similar traits. They fail to understand the whole world isn’t their closed community or that nationalism in other countries never became the Third Reich or that most people don’t have a problem with drinking. They assume others must secretly have these problems or reasons they feel insecure but they have bravely conquered them.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Altai


    A problem I have with narcissists from these extreme religious orders is the same as Germans and drunks with similar traits. They fail to understand the whole world isn’t their closed community or that nationalism in other countries never became the Third Reich
     
    Nationalism in other countries wasn’t surrounded and attacked on all sides by Britain, France, the United States, and the genocidal Soviet Union.
  22. @nokangaroos
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying "you know what you can do with that crap"
    (though in somewhat more Victorian - flowery - prose); Marx got one of these also -
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    - Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked -
    shocked I tell you - his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches - like the
    Europids currently - to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    ... but the rest is too cogent to be left standing - this is not who we are :P

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anon, @James N. Kennett, @RonaldB

    Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians whom Darwin met on the Beagle’s voyage are left these days.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Steve Sailer

    > Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians

    Or Australian Aboriginals.

    Replies: @Emblematic

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Steve Sailer

    Not surprising if beating out the brains of a small child for dropping a basket full of eggs, as described by Darwin in Tierra del Fuego, was a common form of child-raising in that population.

  23. Didn’t Franz Boas already cancel Darwin a century ago?

    • Replies: @anon
    @Anon

    Didn’t Franz Boas already cancel Darwin a century ago?

    Hmm. Only partly, because Darwin was so useful for bashing Christian Fundies.

    I'm reminded of Iowahawk's maxim about lefties and instititutions:


    Take a respected institution.
    Kill it.
    Gut it.
    Wear its carcass as a skin suit.
    And demand respect.
     
  24. This is a curious incident of a dog in the nighttime. A critique of the foundations of our culture, of science, and nary a Jew? Dunsworth? DeSilva? Fuentes? Are those a limey and 2 Italians? 2 Mexicans? In the Ivy League? I guess women will critique the patriarchy without needing further assistance. It is only minorities fighting white supremacy who still need the gentle, guiding hand?

  25. Easy, just reinterpret Darwin as a prophet of the black race’s conquest of the world in this century. If they go from 1 billion to 4 and end up dominating Europe, North America and who knows what else, then what better argument could there be for their superiority?

    • Replies: @HallParvey
    @International Jew

    The western world is dominated by a small group of tribespeople. People who, with selfless dedication to providing for each other, have come to dominate, indeed own, the western world. Through their control of the communication systems of the west, they control the thoughts of the majority of their subordinates.

    Western thought is whatever they want it to be. Except in places like this. This situation did not start yesterday. It dates, more or less, to the time of the Egyptian Pharoahs. Occasionally there are flareups of rebellion, but these are either crushed outright if they are a real threat, or allowed to dissipate if they are not.

    The only real threat to their control currently from China. Depending on how effective they are at seducing the Chinese, their control may actually become worldwide.

    If they are successful and achieve worldwide domination, their group will become fragmented and Cain will again slip a knife into Abel. Only one man can be king of the world. And he will only last until Brutus decides it's time for him to go.

    Darwins observation always took into consideration the fact that any successful species did so only because it was most fit for it's environment. Obviously, the modern world with its plethora of free stuff, is a help for those who recently lived, if they lived, from hand to mouth. Numbers that go up quickly can go down just as quickly.

  26. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Dumbo

    Ahahahahhah.... The epic Battle of Queeringrad.


    Dutch writer Marieke Lucas Rijneveld has stepped down from an assignment to translate Amanda Gorman’s work.

    Rijneveld, who won the International Booker Prize in 2020 with their novel The Discomfort of Evening, shared their decision on Friday on social media.
     

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

    Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their "boyishness". Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.

    Replies: @International Jew, @Intensifier

    Let’s take the extra little step of allowing only blacks to also read her poetry, and it’s all good.

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Thanks: cronkitsche
    • LOL: Rob McX
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @International Jew


    Let’s take the extra little step of allowing only blacks to also read her poetry, and it’s all good.

     

    Our reading it would be cultural appropriation. The perfect excuse!

    (Until she sees her royalty statement.)
  27. @Bardon Kaldian
    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world & .... the Darwin problem solved.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @frontier, @Paperback Writer, @Alt Right Moderate

    It will be much harder to right the wrongs done by wokeness than those done by communism.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob McX

    I disagree, Mr. McX. Wokeness, as it's called this time around, is a precursor to Communism. Once Communism has made enough people economically miserable enough, there won't be any energy left for wokeness. Communism outlasts wokeness.

    Replies: @Rob McX

  28. @Dumbo
    Well, Darwin was wrong, we're obviously devolving, not evolving.

    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/amanda-gorman-poem-translation-dutch-b1808315.html

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Altai, @Gordo

    Related: now only Blacks are allowed to translate the work of other Blacks:

    Who reads that crap anyway?

  29. @Rob McX
    @Bardon Kaldian

    It will be much harder to right the wrongs done by wokeness than those done by communism.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I disagree, Mr. McX. Wokeness, as it’s called this time around, is a precursor to Communism. Once Communism has made enough people economically miserable enough, there won’t be any energy left for wokeness. Communism outlasts wokeness.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Wokeness, as it’s called this time around, is a precursor to Communism.
     
    I don't think so. It may be the precursor to some form of totalitarian rule, but it won't be like the former regimes of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. It's hard to make predictions, but I'd say much of the dirty work formerly done by the state will be done by private companies. We've seen how eager they are to track and censor people.

    When I say it's easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn't (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism. The damage done was economic and social. Demographic change is much harder to reverse.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anon

  30. This part is really something:

    And then on the flipside, says DeSilva, “I would read these chapters about race and sex differences and just cringe. Wow was he off. And why was he so off? Was he simply a product of his time? Or did he just have these deep biases as a privileged British man [in the Victorian colonial era]?”

    The problem is that Darwin could have done better at the time. He could have known better. “He had the data to do it, it’s not like he couldn’t go against the tide of the times,” says DeSilva. “I mean, he wrote Origin of Species!”

    This DeSilva sure is an arrogant S.O.B. He can’t even imagine how much he’s been brainwashed in academia.

    Darwin should have known better, per DeSilva. Listen to this fool. Talk about your descent of Man…

  31. Fuentes says that Darwin would have “championed the lack of biological ‘races’ [today].”

    I seriously doubt this. There’s a reason he called it The Descent of Man, and it is not what they would like to think.

  32. “Problematic” is such a weasely turn of phrase. It implies “wrong” but in reality means “right but unspeakable.” In the new religion, it’s not the truth that will set you free but playing coy. It would be interesting to see if it’s possible to construct an entire theory of logic that allows True, False, and Problematic in every Truth table.

    • Agree: Clyde
  33. A nice heuristic, assuming you’re still taking an article seriously despite the headline, is to stop reading as soon as the word “problematic” or an equivalent appears. What a wonderful time saver!

  34. But I’m not comfortable or interested in imagining such personal things about him and that’s maybe because I’m angry with him and don’t want to give him a part of me,” says Dunsworth.

    Women.

  35. @nokangaroos
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying "you know what you can do with that crap"
    (though in somewhat more Victorian - flowery - prose); Marx got one of these also -
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    - Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked -
    shocked I tell you - his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches - like the
    Europids currently - to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    ... but the rest is too cogent to be left standing - this is not who we are :P

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anon, @James N. Kennett, @RonaldB

    any species that switches – like the
    Europids currently – to exclusive intraspecific selection

    What do you mean by this?

  36. anon[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @Altai
    @Dumbo

    Oh my god, she's an 'Enby' and looks faintly autistic. And makes zero effort to present as anything other than female despite her protestations. And rather than embrace her as an ally, they smell blood and weakness and punish her for her wokeness for being a 'boring' red haired Dutch woman. It's just resentment towards white people in the abstract, nothing is ever good enough.

    Rijneveld is said to have developed an interest in writing in primary school after reading J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, which they borrowed from the local library. Because in Reformed circles references to magic are considered taboo, Rijneveld copied out the whole book onto their computer so they could re-read it upon returning the novel. Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their "boyishness". Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.
     

    Well, at least she they wrote another book. And basically let the bullies win by embracing a male/female identity in order to be 'correct'.

    A problem I have with narcissists from these extreme religious orders is the same as Germans and drunks with similar traits. They fail to understand the whole world isn't their closed community or that nationalism in other countries never became the Third Reich or that most people don't have a problem with drinking. They assume others must secretly have these problems or reasons they feel insecure but they have bravely conquered them.

    Replies: @anon

    A problem I have with narcissists from these extreme religious orders is the same as Germans and drunks with similar traits. They fail to understand the whole world isn’t their closed community or that nationalism in other countries never became the Third Reich

    Nationalism in other countries wasn’t surrounded and attacked on all sides by Britain, France, the United States, and the genocidal Soviet Union.

  37. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Dumbo

    Ahahahahhah.... The epic Battle of Queeringrad.


    Dutch writer Marieke Lucas Rijneveld has stepped down from an assignment to translate Amanda Gorman’s work.

    Rijneveld, who won the International Booker Prize in 2020 with their novel The Discomfort of Evening, shared their decision on Friday on social media.
     

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

    Rijneveld identifies as both male and female, and adopted the second first name Lucas at the age of nineteen, having been bullied during secondary education because of their "boyishness". Rijneveld uses they/them personal pronouns.

    Replies: @International Jew, @Intensifier

    The self-referential narcissism drips from them.

    As if anyone gives a sh!t how many identifications she has.

  38. How about the preponderance of Blacks in the NBA and the NFL? Is that also unequal bodies arising from systemic racism?

  39. @Rob McX
    These people's lack of self awareness is fascinating. In reality, they're the 21st century equivalent of the outraged Victorian clerics and schoolmarms who railed against Darwin and his theory of evolution. But they don't doubt for a moment that they're on the side of science against ignorance, prejudice and "privilege''.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Prester John, @Desiderius, @Unladen Swallow

    > These people’s lack of self awareness is fascinating.

    Quote from actual journalist Michael Powell’s NYT article (iSteve’s Open Season on Townies post).

    “It’s a feature of elite academic institutions that faculty and students don’t recognize what it means to be elite,” said Smith College prof Marc Lendler.

  40. @Steve Sailer
    @nokangaroos

    Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians whom Darwin met on the Beagle's voyage are left these days.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Jonathan Mason

    > Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians

    Or Australian Aboriginals.

    • Replies: @Emblematic
    @ic1000

    There's still lots of Australian Aboriginals around, and their numbers are increasing. Perhaps you're thinking of Tasmanian Aboriginals. None of them left.

  41. Tom Bethell discussed the problem of the reconciliation of Darwin with Marx 42 years ago. He called his article “Burning Darwin to Save Marx.” His successors have abandoned the problem. They simply issue another Encyclical.

  42. @Rob McX
    These people's lack of self awareness is fascinating. In reality, they're the 21st century equivalent of the outraged Victorian clerics and schoolmarms who railed against Darwin and his theory of evolution. But they don't doubt for a moment that they're on the side of science against ignorance, prejudice and "privilege''.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Prester John, @Desiderius, @Unladen Swallow

    What gets me is that this crowd operates under the assumption that Darwin “got it wrong” when, given what we actually know with certainty (or, perhaps more accurately, DON’T know), is very much up for grabs.

  43. My main takeaway from Descent of Man was that Darwin really, really likes birds. 200 solid pages on sexual selection in birds – far more than he devotes to humans.

  44. @anon
    They will never get to Darwin. The mob couldn't possibly take the time or effort to actually read his books. Or have the ability. Someone would have to deconstruct it into tweets.

    And they can't get him fired or de-platformed.

    Plus there are still lots of creationists out there. He's useful for that.

    Replies: @Old and Grumpy, @Forbes

    Darwin is a white man, so there’s that reason to cancel. However I don’t think team cancel can afford to ditch his myth of the out of Africa. Now there is a way they can have both: a creation of make believe black African mistress of Darwin’s. She told him the unwritten history, and he appropriated it.

  45. The English and Americans of English background seem to be the biggest fans of Darwin.

    Ashkenazi (specifically a NYC subset) seem most willing to throw him overboard, at least partially.

    It looks like “really smart” White Gentiles thought they had a bond with Ashkenazi based on their shared super duper IQs. Golly, so shocking they got played once again.

  46. [Science historian Janet] Browne wrote the introduction to the new book…

    “Darwin proposed that sexual selection was instrumental in explaining the origin of what he called human ‘races’ and cultural progress,” writes Browne… “sexual selection among humans would also affect mental traits such as intelligence and maternal love.”

    Browne is correct, and that concluded the substance of Deutsche Welle writer Zulfikar Abbany’s article. The rest is a critique by the Neo-Victorian Pearl-Clutchers. Or, here at iSteve, fodder for a critique of the NV-PCs.

    Sexual selection is assortative mating, and assortative mating is sexual selection.

    Below the fold is a listing of the living people mentioned in Abbany’s piece. How many of their romantic partners have IQs <100? Flunked college, HotOrNot <5, flip burgers at McDonalds, have a rap sheet, hail from Fishtown or one of its EU analogs?

    50:1 odds that these elitists' revealed preferences are a striking endorsement of Darwin's ideas.

    [MORE]

    Zulfikar Abbany
    Janet Browne, science historian at Harvard
    Jeremy DeSilva, Dartmouth anthropologist
    Augustin Fuentes, Princeton anthropologist
    Holly Dunsworth, U. Rhode Island anthropologist
    Claire Reymond, scientific editor at China University of Geosciences

    “A Most Interesting Problem” contributors:
    Jeremy DeSilva, editor
    Janet Browne
    Alice Roberts
    Suzana Herculana-Houzel
    Brian Hare
    Johannes Haile-Selassie [sic]
    Kristina Killgrove
    John Hawks [!!]
    Augustin Fuentes
    Michael J. Ryan
    Holly Dunsworth
    Ann Gibbons

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @ic1000

    Neo-Victorian Pearl-Clutchers would happily mate with an aboriginal if fate so decreed.

    When the college educated American White liberal woman wants to breed she strips herself naked and walks to the nearest Black bbq pit. She loudly declares that genetics do not exist and any man may have her.

    Happens all the time.

    , @Calvin Hobbes
    @ic1000


    John Hawks [!!]
     
    I tried to find out what Hawks wrote about in his contribution to the book. The first page of his piece is here:

    https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780691210810-010/html

    I can’t tell where his piece is going, though.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

  47. @International Jew
    Easy, just reinterpret Darwin as a prophet of the black race's conquest of the world in this century. If they go from 1 billion to 4 and end up dominating Europe, North America and who knows what else, then what better argument could there be for their superiority?

    Replies: @HallParvey

    The western world is dominated by a small group of tribespeople. People who, with selfless dedication to providing for each other, have come to dominate, indeed own, the western world. Through their control of the communication systems of the west, they control the thoughts of the majority of their subordinates.

    Western thought is whatever they want it to be. Except in places like this. This situation did not start yesterday. It dates, more or less, to the time of the Egyptian Pharoahs. Occasionally there are flareups of rebellion, but these are either crushed outright if they are a real threat, or allowed to dissipate if they are not.

    The only real threat to their control currently from China. Depending on how effective they are at seducing the Chinese, their control may actually become worldwide.

    If they are successful and achieve worldwide domination, their group will become fragmented and Cain will again slip a knife into Abel. Only one man can be king of the world. And he will only last until Brutus decides it’s time for him to go.

    Darwins observation always took into consideration the fact that any successful species did so only because it was most fit for it’s environment. Obviously, the modern world with its plethora of free stuff, is a help for those who recently lived, if they lived, from hand to mouth. Numbers that go up quickly can go down just as quickly.

  48. @J.Ross
    I'm not going to post or name inappropriate material but there's an adult relaxation vid in which a fully clothed woman recites a monologue to a camera* to the effect that, presupposing modern concepts of consent,** the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, as what men exist are what men were desired and bred into existence by women. She reads a passage from a textbook in support of this, but it's effectively just a definition.
    There is so much stuff out there that can't be posted but is often wierdly relevant or funny, in part because of an explosion of independent production, in part because all of mainstream entertainment has imploded into Teletubbies Teach You To Love Big Brother.

    *That's what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style, and if that sounds wierd you might be part of the generation wrecking the country.

    **Shhhh. Don't tell her. Her version is prettier. Thanks to Democrat rule we'll be back to hair-dragging soon enough. Let 'em all go to hell except Cave Twenty-Three.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Alden

    * That’s what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style

    You only say that because the Attenborough-style is ubiquitus. Your contention is like saying that a commentary on sport is better than watching the Olympics.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Chrisnonymous

    >the Olympics

    Excellent example, the Olympics are mostly the most boring, overhyped, unwatchable and unwatched form of televised sports.

  49. I know that those who attack Darwin are a seedy bunch of opportunist post-modernist lynch-mob with freak & unnatural agenda, but … Darwinianism is not a science. Sure, it is a part of modern evolutionary biology (is it a science?), and I think Popper was closer to truth when he claimed that evolutionary theory (ET) was a brilliant research program, but not a science. I would go even further & call it a meta-theory with enormous positive consequences – but not a science (both creationists & IDers are not worth the trouble).

    Something to ponder on: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/691119

    POPPER’S SHIFTING APPRAISALOF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY

    Then, there is the big bang. Not old, discarded opposition, but perfectly reasonable attitude that the entire creation story with big bang is not scientific. Peebles is explicit about it:

    https://phys.org/news/2019-11-cosmologist-lonely-big-theory.html

    Top cosmologist’s lonely battle against ‘Big Bang’ theory

    James Peebles won this year’s Nobel prize in physics for helping transform the field of cosmology into a respected science, but if there’s one term he hates to hear, it’s “Big Bang Theory.”
    ……………………………..

    But “the first thing to understand about my field is that its name, Big Bang Theory, is quite inappropriate,” the 84-year-old told a rapt audience at an event honoring US-based Nobel Prize winners at a Swedish Embassy event in Washington on Wednesday.

    It connotes the notion of an event and a position, both of which are quite wrong,” he continued, adding there is in fact no concrete evidence for a giant explosion.

    The Nobel committee last month honored Peebles for his work since the mid-1960s developing the now prevalent theoretical framework for the young universe.

    But he is careful to note that he does not know about the “beginning.”

    It’s very unfortunate that one thinks of the beginning whereas in fact, we have no good theory of such a thing as the beginning,” he told AFP in an interview.

    So, Darwin’s meta-theory is great; it almost certainly explains much of the differences re sex & races; as a research program, it- if not curtailed – will probably enrich other fields; and, any way you interpret or modify it- it cannot strengthen the Woke cause.

    The Woke science is a post-modernist blather which is not even a serious metaphysics (let alone science), but a set of unnatural dogmas which can be refuted & which are contrary not just to the common sense (like most of quantum mechanics), but to any sense at all.

  50. You should see what the “Science” community has done to James Watson.. guess they don’t credit him for discovering DNA anymore… instead they say it is a Swiss scientist in 1860… probably because they canceled him due to his thought crimes. Which amounted to having the audacity to mention the bell curve and maybe there is a genetic component to intelligence. I dunno… Jews have high IQs generally when we count up the score and boy are they inbred, with their marrying inside their religion..

    So… I have white skin, or blue eyes or a hairy ass… which is heredity. But my intelligence or any trait related to sex is not heredity. I can be a blue haired manatee if I want, non binary etc?

    Scientist who are liberal douches for the most part, are all for Darwin until it hits their relgion.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    @Stonewall Jackson

    Watson and Crick did not "discover" DNA any more than Kekulé invented benzene.
    They "merely" resolved its first-order structure ("double helix") by x-ray diffraction*
    and kicked off a quantum leap in the biosciences.

    *Max v. Laue 1912, Nobel 1914; v. Laue BTW was instrumental in rehabilitating
    German physics after German Physics ... it´s a sobering thought that once upon a time even the antifascists had brains :(

  51. @Intensifier
    It's a difficult one for the woke, isn't it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their "God created all men equal" palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things and in his pre 21st-century innocence actually admitting that he had noticed things.

    Toughy!

    They will probably solve it by concluding that his ideas on evolution were in fact stolen from a collective of cave-dwelling pansexual womyn in Botswana whereas his nasty thoughtcrime about male creativity was of course purely Europen in origin and hey presto all will be well.

    Replies: @Anon, @Spangel123

    That’s barely an exaggeration. John Leguizamo’s Tony award winning “Latin history for Morons” (on netflix) actually expounds the theory that the founding fathers stole all their ideas (constitutional democracy etc) from the Iroquois. Much like how hannah nikole jones believes america’s wealth was fundamentally built by black. basically all the good ideas of western civ were stolen from non whites, who were then not given credit and exploited by whites, whose main idea is how to oppress other people and maintain power over them.

  52. …the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States.

    And you wonder why nobody takes Protestantism seriously anymore.

    • Thanks: nokangaroos
  53. @International Jew
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Let's take the extra little step of allowing only blacks to also read her poetry, and it's all good.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Let’s take the extra little step of allowing only blacks to also read her poetry, and it’s all good.

    Our reading it would be cultural appropriation. The perfect excuse!

    (Until she sees her royalty statement.)

  54. @J.Ross
    I'm not going to post or name inappropriate material but there's an adult relaxation vid in which a fully clothed woman recites a monologue to a camera* to the effect that, presupposing modern concepts of consent,** the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, as what men exist are what men were desired and bred into existence by women. She reads a passage from a textbook in support of this, but it's effectively just a definition.
    There is so much stuff out there that can't be posted but is often wierdly relevant or funny, in part because of an explosion of independent production, in part because all of mainstream entertainment has imploded into Teletubbies Teach You To Love Big Brother.

    *That's what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style, and if that sounds wierd you might be part of the generation wrecking the country.

    **Shhhh. Don't tell her. Her version is prettier. Thanks to Democrat rule we'll be back to hair-dragging soon enough. Let 'em all go to hell except Cave Twenty-Three.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Alden

    More tales from the probation department. When I was a probation officer many of the thugs were 19-25 still living wit mamma. And Dey Mammas were active in their criminal cases.

    I noticed that black women do raise their sons to be aggressive and dangerous. They brag about it. School teachers notice this too. Even well paid affirmative action blacks encourage their sons to be aggressive. Some say it’s because black neighborhoods are so dangerous it’s the best way to survive. Especially in a no husband culture.

    It’s an interesting idea.

  55. From the standpoint of today’s left, Darwin was valuable because he provided a plausible creation myth that didn’t require God. Now that the intelligentsia are largely atheists, Darwin can be discarded as having served his purpose. The rest of Darwinism is not only not useful to leftists, but contrary to their beliefs. They much prefer a more refined and sophisticated version of Lysenkoism.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Crawfurdmuir

    The rest of Darwinism is not only not useful to leftists, but contrary to their beliefs. They much prefer a more refined and sophisticated version of Lysenkoism.

    Next step is a Ministry of Truth and comments like yours will be submitted to the authorities.

    I support this New Science as the Old White Science was not giving us the answers we wanted.

    , @Desiderius
    @Crawfurdmuir

    Darwinism is the unexamined premise from which they reach conclusions which seem to force disingenuousness. In that framework Lysenkoism is the lie of greatest evident utility toward defending and advancing their interests.

  56. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. (…) “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”
     
    According to Emily Poast he should have used “Esteemed salutations, my good bitch!”

    Replies: @BB753, @nokangaroos, @mousey, @Alden

    I don’t know. I kind of like Darwin’s ironic salutation in lieu of your sarcasm. Either one is pretty good but Darwin’s is clever and more subtle (irony usually is) and seems to still be confounding the over educated today.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @mousey


    in lieu of your sarcasm
     
    My sarcasm? That hale, convivial greeting was from Emily Poast, my good bitch!


    https://i.imgur.com/K79b7nZ.jpg

  57. @BB753
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Whatever happened with St. Paul's teachings that women should remain silent, veiled, and submissive in church?
    https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm

    Replies: @Alden, @anon

    Pussy whipped nerds submissive to bullying shrew wives often quote St Paul. It’s a well known pattern.

    • Disagree: BB753
    • Replies: @BB753
    @Alden

    No, pussy submissive nerds usually quote some BS New Age or Buddhist wisdom.

    Replies: @Alden

  58. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. (…) “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”
     
    According to Emily Poast he should have used “Esteemed salutations, my good bitch!”

    Replies: @BB753, @nokangaroos, @mousey, @Alden

    If DeSilva were as educated as it claims it it is; it would know that there were many women authors in Darwin’s time.

    Close down every university and college in the country. Engineers and scientists can have the old fashioned 19th century polytechnics and mechanics institutes. Drs can skip the ridiculous BA bullshit requirement and go directly to a 5 year MD program as is done UK and Ireland. Nurses can go back to the 3 year program.

    And employers can start training their employees to the specific skills needed as is still done in Germany, one of the foremost economic powerhouses of the world.

    • Agree: MBlanc46
  59. None of these so-called scientists (they’re anthropologists, so there not really scientists) describe how anything Darwin wrote is wrong. They’re entire argument amounts to “I can’t even…..”. The fact that they put the word race in scare quotes indicates how seriously one should take them (not at all).

    After Descent of Man, Brown Blackwell wrote a book called The Sexes Throughout Nature, which explores ideas of equality, and she sent copies to Darwin.

    “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”

    Probably because the first name “Brown” doesn’t exactly sound feminine. Perhaps Reverend Blackwell should have stated her pronouns.

  60. @Bardon Kaldian
    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world & .... the Darwin problem solved.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @frontier, @Paperback Writer, @Alt Right Moderate

    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world

    Do you have a link or citation? I’m serious, I’d like to figure out which collapse is going to happen first – of wokeness or of most of the world? I wouldn’t bet on the former.

  61. How Long Until They Come for Darwin?

    I don’t know. I though he’d been kicked out of the club a couple of years ago. Nevertheless, I’ll be there to take a photo when the new Puritans come to knock his statue down. That’ll be worth seeing. Or have they already done that?

  62. Charles Darwin has been kept sacrosanct during the Great Awokening because his On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life is about plants and animals rather than about humans and thus is a stick in the eye to Christian creationists.

    This is the only interest that liberals had in Darwin. Poking the eye of what is perceived as a White religion. This is also why the title of Origin is normally shortened while you can find other biology books with excessively long titles.

    If you use the same stick to poke liberals then UZ JUST A SCIENCE HATER AND RAYCISS.

    “Darwin proposed that sexual selection was instrumental in explaining the origin of what he called human ‘races’ and cultural progress,” writes Browne.

    And how exactly wouldn’t sexual selection affect cultural progress and racial differences? Is sexual selection actually random and populations were under the same pressures? This makes zero sense. Lactase persistence just happened to evolve in Europe where they had mastered domesticating cows for dairy? What an amazing coincidence!

    He thought sexual selection was an important factor in the development of the human mind as well

    So intelligence never increased from sexual selection. Amazing! The smart guy that planned for the winter was just as appealing to women as the idiot that was half starving.

    Really amusing that these egalitarians don’t even realize that the crux of their counter argument is that Darwin was wrong about sex and race because he was a product of his time. That actually isn’t a scientific argument.

  63. @Crawfurdmuir
    From the standpoint of today's left, Darwin was valuable because he provided a plausible creation myth that didn't require God. Now that the intelligentsia are largely atheists, Darwin can be discarded as having served his purpose. The rest of Darwinism is not only not useful to leftists, but contrary to their beliefs. They much prefer a more refined and sophisticated version of Lysenkoism.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Desiderius

    The rest of Darwinism is not only not useful to leftists, but contrary to their beliefs. They much prefer a more refined and sophisticated version of Lysenkoism.

    Next step is a Ministry of Truth and comments like yours will be submitted to the authorities.

    I support this New Science as the Old White Science was not giving us the answers we wanted.

  64. @Rob McX
    These people's lack of self awareness is fascinating. In reality, they're the 21st century equivalent of the outraged Victorian clerics and schoolmarms who railed against Darwin and his theory of evolution. But they don't doubt for a moment that they're on the side of science against ignorance, prejudice and "privilege''.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Prester John, @Desiderius, @Unladen Swallow

    If those were your selves you wouldn’t risk awareness either. Seems the more pressing question is why we let them dominate us.

  65. @ic1000

    [Science historian Janet] Browne wrote the introduction to the new book...

    “Darwin proposed that sexual selection was instrumental in explaining the origin of what he called human ‘races’ and cultural progress,” writes Browne... “sexual selection among humans would also affect mental traits such as intelligence and maternal love.”
     

    Browne is correct, and that concluded the substance of Deutsche Welle writer Zulfikar Abbany's article. The rest is a critique by the Neo-Victorian Pearl-Clutchers. Or, here at iSteve, fodder for a critique of the NV-PCs.

    Sexual selection is assortative mating, and assortative mating is sexual selection.

    Below the fold is a listing of the living people mentioned in Abbany's piece. How many of their romantic partners have IQs <100? Flunked college, HotOrNot <5, flip burgers at McDonalds, have a rap sheet, hail from Fishtown or one of its EU analogs?

    50:1 odds that these elitists' revealed preferences are a striking endorsement of Darwin's ideas.

    Zulfikar Abbany
    Janet Browne, science historian at Harvard
    Jeremy DeSilva, Dartmouth anthropologist
    Augustin Fuentes, Princeton anthropologist
    Holly Dunsworth, U. Rhode Island anthropologist
    Claire Reymond, scientific editor at China University of Geosciences

    "A Most Interesting Problem" contributors:
    Jeremy DeSilva, editor
    Janet Browne
    Alice Roberts
    Suzana Herculana-Houzel
    Brian Hare
    Johannes Haile-Selassie [sic]
    Kristina Killgrove
    John Hawks [!!]
    Augustin Fuentes
    Michael J. Ryan
    Holly Dunsworth
    Ann Gibbons

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Calvin Hobbes

    Neo-Victorian Pearl-Clutchers would happily mate with an aboriginal if fate so decreed.

    When the college educated American White liberal woman wants to breed she strips herself naked and walks to the nearest Black bbq pit. She loudly declares that genetics do not exist and any man may have her.

    Happens all the time.

  66. When will they cancel Darwin? Like you said, their only remaining use for him is to spite the few remaining fundamentalist Christians who don’t believe in evolution. So it will depend on when TPTB perceive FCs to be a sociopolitical non-entity. That’s not the same as FCs actually becoming a non-entity, because reality usually runs well ahead of perception when it comes to these kinds of things. And it will also depend on country — This article is from the “Made for the Mindless” news source one city upstream from me, and FCs never were that powerful on the Continent and the Island as they were in the United States. Which means Darwin will be canceled in Europe and Britain before he is in the ‘States, because it will take TPTB in the ‘States longer to realize that FCs are no longer powerful.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @countenance

    That assumes no new fundies. Medieval elites made that mistake already.

    Ad fontes

  67. “If only Darwin had been a bit brighter, he’d have understood that all these structuralistically systematicalized systemical structures of racism were clouding his thought and causing him to make obvious mistakes, like… like… well I, mean it’s just so obviously wrong! I mean based on everything we know today!”

    Seriously, can these people offer a single example of something he got wrong, other than when he misgendered Antoinette Brown Blackwell? I’m sure he made plenty of incorrect assertions in Descent (it was written 150 years ago!), but they did not explain why anything he said was wrong, just tossed out conclusory statements.

    And this Holly Dunsworth sounds like a spoiled kindergartener. “I’m really mad at [Darwin] and don’t want to give him a part of me.” Give him a part of you? Dear lord, the devouring narcissism of these people!

  68. @Crawfurdmuir
    From the standpoint of today's left, Darwin was valuable because he provided a plausible creation myth that didn't require God. Now that the intelligentsia are largely atheists, Darwin can be discarded as having served his purpose. The rest of Darwinism is not only not useful to leftists, but contrary to their beliefs. They much prefer a more refined and sophisticated version of Lysenkoism.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Desiderius

    Darwinism is the unexamined premise from which they reach conclusions which seem to force disingenuousness. In that framework Lysenkoism is the lie of greatest evident utility toward defending and advancing their interests.

  69. @countenance
    When will they cancel Darwin? Like you said, their only remaining use for him is to spite the few remaining fundamentalist Christians who don't believe in evolution. So it will depend on when TPTB perceive FCs to be a sociopolitical non-entity. That's not the same as FCs actually becoming a non-entity, because reality usually runs well ahead of perception when it comes to these kinds of things. And it will also depend on country -- This article is from the "Made for the Mindless" news source one city upstream from me, and FCs never were that powerful on the Continent and the Island as they were in the United States. Which means Darwin will be canceled in Europe and Britain before he is in the 'States, because it will take TPTB in the 'States longer to realize that FCs are no longer powerful.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    That assumes no new fundies. Medieval elites made that mistake already.

    Ad fontes

  70. He argued that sexual selection explained why humans had broken off into different racial groups. Skin color and hair were important indicators. But according to Darwin, writes Browne, “sexual selection among humans would also affect mental traits such as intelligence and maternal love […] .”

    And that even within the racial groups. Darwin wrote: “Man is more courageous, pugnacious, and energetic than woman, and has more inventive genius.”

    He ain’t wrong…

  71. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob McX

    I disagree, Mr. McX. Wokeness, as it's called this time around, is a precursor to Communism. Once Communism has made enough people economically miserable enough, there won't be any energy left for wokeness. Communism outlasts wokeness.

    Replies: @Rob McX

    Wokeness, as it’s called this time around, is a precursor to Communism.

    I don’t think so. It may be the precursor to some form of totalitarian rule, but it won’t be like the former regimes of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. It’s hard to make predictions, but I’d say much of the dirty work formerly done by the state will be done by private companies. We’ve seen how eager they are to track and censor people.

    When I say it’s easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn’t (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism. The damage done was economic and social. Demographic change is much harder to reverse.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob McX

    I disagree on your 1st paragraph because government and Big-Biz will become as one anyway. They can call it something else, but Communism under any other name smells just as sour.

    I agree completely on your 2nd though. It took 40-70 years (China/Russia) to eradicate the Commies, and that was with the outside influence of the West, including America and Ronald Reagan. You are quite right that with the demographic change, there is no such thing as reversal, and whether Communist, Socialist or supposedly a Democracy, who cares? It won't be us anyway.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    , @Anon
    @Rob McX


    When I say it’s easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn’t (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism.
     
    Population replacement or, if not replacement, the atomization of the White ethny or destruction of the White nation-state, may in fact have been the motivation of the original communists (Bolsheviks). Apparently, in the decades after the revolution, some power was wrested away from them by more nationalistic communists.

    Replies: @G. Poulin

  72. @Anon
    @Intensifier


    It’s a difficult one for the woke, isn’t it?

    On the one hand, Darwin can be called in aid against the detested loathed Christians with their “God created all men equal” palaver. but on the other, he was guilty of the crime of noticing things
     

    What is motivating the, as you call them, “woke”? How do you reconcile these two campaigns of theirs?

    Replies: @Chensley

    What is motivating the, as you call them, “woke”? How do you reconcile these two campaigns of theirs?

    The motivation is that they will use any and all tools available to them regardless if it shows them as inconsistent. It’s about winning and they’ll do whatever it takes. This seems strange to people that try to be logical and consistent in their thoughts and actions, but once you understand that these people are cut from an entirely different cloth than you, then things start to make sense.

    The opponents of SJWs/wokes ought to become more Schmittian in their thought and start acting on the very real friend-enemy distinction that is intrinsic to politics. By that I mean that they need to make the lives of these people such a living hell that they leave and never set foot on the same territory or even think about retaliating.

  73. @Jon

    radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that
     
    Well, maybe a single reason...

    SPANISH STUDY FINDS VITAMIN D ‘REDUCES COVID-19 DEATHS BY 60%’
     
    https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2021/02/15/spanish-study-finds-vitamin-d-reduces-covid-19-deaths-by-60/

    Replies: @Chensley

    radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that

    Well, maybe a single reason…

    They set up this false dichotomy that there has to be a single genetic cause for all those problems otherwise that hypothesis must be wrong. It’s an extremely intellectually dishonest thing to do.

    It makes me wonder if any IQ studies have been done on egalitarians vs. HBDers.

  74. @anon
    They will never get to Darwin. The mob couldn't possibly take the time or effort to actually read his books. Or have the ability. Someone would have to deconstruct it into tweets.

    And they can't get him fired or de-platformed.

    Plus there are still lots of creationists out there. He's useful for that.

    Replies: @Old and Grumpy, @Forbes

    The mob couldn’t possibly take the time or effort to actually read his books.

    That’s not an obstacle to woke-prog-left book banning. Usually one quote or word, even out of context, is sufficient.

  75. has anybody noticed that almost all of the women who actually do accomplish something that is important or valuable, are european women? not even jewish women most of the time. east asian women do almost nothing important ever.

    i assume if this is ever noticed in a larger audience, it will be taken as further evidence of white supreeemism or something along those lines. i figure most smart jewish women spend their lives on some sort of activism, which is always a direct attack on european society, and produces only things of negative value, so that doesn’t leave much room to reach high achievement in anything constructive. outside of a chemistry or physics lab, which is where their few real accomplishments have been, they seem to have no positive effect on society at all.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    @prime noticer

    Lynn Margulis?

  76. @Rob McX
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Wokeness, as it’s called this time around, is a precursor to Communism.
     
    I don't think so. It may be the precursor to some form of totalitarian rule, but it won't be like the former regimes of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. It's hard to make predictions, but I'd say much of the dirty work formerly done by the state will be done by private companies. We've seen how eager they are to track and censor people.

    When I say it's easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn't (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism. The damage done was economic and social. Demographic change is much harder to reverse.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anon

    I disagree on your 1st paragraph because government and Big-Biz will become as one anyway. They can call it something else, but Communism under any other name smells just as sour.

    I agree completely on your 2nd though. It took 40-70 years (China/Russia) to eradicate the Commies, and that was with the outside influence of the West, including America and Ronald Reagan. You are quite right that with the demographic change, there is no such thing as reversal, and whether Communist, Socialist or supposedly a Democracy, who cares? It won’t be us anyway.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Even Marxists don't believe in Communism anymore.

    They'll never return to thinking that the government should control all production.

    What they want is Brazil 2.0 but with complete social control.

    Basically turn the world into one big Brazilian market dominated by multi-national corps and then re-write history so all races contributed equally.

    It sounds crazy but look at how Biden was saying that a Black man invented the light bulb. Then left resents Whites in both the past and the present. In their minds White people unfairly shadow everyone else and outbreeding them isn't enough.

    We even had a leftist here talk about how race probably exists but we need to push for a multi-racial star trek anyways. High level leftists know that they have to lie about race and that communal ownership was a total failure. They still see Marx as a guide for change however.

  77. as for the scientific discarding of Darwin, i suppose only in the case that ongoing evidence collection or computer modeling continue to have trouble finding the corroboration for inorganic chemistry -> organic chemistry, how prokaryotes became eukaryotes, or how the estimated duration of the cambrian explosion was enough time for the observed speciation in the fossil record.

    those seem to be the main attack points in serious science.

    it seems to me that single cell lifeforms may not be extremely rare in this galaxy or other galaxies, but maybe they don’t often make it to the multi cell stage, which took about 1 billion years on earth using our current understanding. you need 1 billion years of being completely defenseless and not being wiped out, just to get to the point of being algae.

    however, we know from our own planet, that their metabolism affects the chemistry of a planet’s atmosphere, so maybe we could eventually detect this in exoplanets with better optics, as long as it’s happening now, and not 8 billion years ago or something, which we wouldn’t be able to observe.

  78. I recommend getting out in front of this. As we now know, thanks to the BBC among others, the streets of Britain were swarming with POCs in Darwins day. It is incontroversible that Darwin himself was black.

  79. @BB753
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Whatever happened with St. Paul's teachings that women should remain silent, veiled, and submissive in church?
    https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm

    Replies: @Alden, @anon

    Antioinette Blackwell was a Congregationalist. Most of those churches eventually wound up as Unitarian. She went to Oberlin which apparently was a weak spot 150 years ago.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @anon

    Unitarians don't believe in the Trinity, like Jehova's Witnesses. They're not Christian.

    Replies: @anon

  80. @Polistra

    Then there was the time that Darwin wrote to Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first female ordained Protestant minister in the United States. After Descent of Man, Brown Blackwell wrote a book called The Sexes Throughout Nature, which explores ideas of equality, and she sent copies to Darwin.

    “He writes back, and his letter starts ‘Dear Sir’,” says DeSilva, astounded. “It makes me wonder: Can he not even imagine that a woman has written a book?”

    Holly Dunsworth, an anthropologist at the University of Rhode Island also contributed to A Most Interesting Problem. She answers DeSilva’s question rather plainly: It was “men and patriarchal traditions” that prevented female scientists from cutting through in Darwin’s time.
     

    Dilemma: 1) the Patriarchy squelched women's legitimate attempts at accomplishment. 2) Pioneering women accomplished so much! Even back in Darwin's time.

    https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/019/571/dailystruggg.jpg

    Replies: @martin_2

    That’s exactly what I thought with respect to all these alleged black scientists and inventors that come up when you google “American scientist”. If blacks were so oppressed and denied education how come all the scientists and inventors were black?

  81. @Anon
    Didn't Franz Boas already cancel Darwin a century ago?

    Replies: @anon

    Didn’t Franz Boas already cancel Darwin a century ago?

    Hmm. Only partly, because Darwin was so useful for bashing Christian Fundies.

    I’m reminded of Iowahawk’s maxim about lefties and instititutions:

    Take a respected institution.
    Kill it.
    Gut it.
    Wear its carcass as a skin suit.
    And demand respect.

  82. @Rob McX
    These people's lack of self awareness is fascinating. In reality, they're the 21st century equivalent of the outraged Victorian clerics and schoolmarms who railed against Darwin and his theory of evolution. But they don't doubt for a moment that they're on the side of science against ignorance, prejudice and "privilege''.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Prester John, @Desiderius, @Unladen Swallow

    Interesting that the piece denounces Dawkins and Pinker as (in)famous, all the anti-Trump bromides from both doesn’t protect them from their fellow PC driven academics.

  83. Anon[553] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rob McX
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Wokeness, as it’s called this time around, is a precursor to Communism.
     
    I don't think so. It may be the precursor to some form of totalitarian rule, but it won't be like the former regimes of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. It's hard to make predictions, but I'd say much of the dirty work formerly done by the state will be done by private companies. We've seen how eager they are to track and censor people.

    When I say it's easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn't (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism. The damage done was economic and social. Demographic change is much harder to reverse.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anon

    When I say it’s easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn’t (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism.

    Population replacement or, if not replacement, the atomization of the White ethny or destruction of the White nation-state, may in fact have been the motivation of the original communists (Bolsheviks). Apparently, in the decades after the revolution, some power was wrested away from them by more nationalistic communists.

    • Replies: @G. Poulin
    @Anon

    Yes. Unfortunately for the old Bolsheviks, it turned out that Stalin hated Jews almost as much as Hitler did. Surprise !

    Replies: @Alden

  84. @ic1000

    [Science historian Janet] Browne wrote the introduction to the new book...

    “Darwin proposed that sexual selection was instrumental in explaining the origin of what he called human ‘races’ and cultural progress,” writes Browne... “sexual selection among humans would also affect mental traits such as intelligence and maternal love.”
     

    Browne is correct, and that concluded the substance of Deutsche Welle writer Zulfikar Abbany's article. The rest is a critique by the Neo-Victorian Pearl-Clutchers. Or, here at iSteve, fodder for a critique of the NV-PCs.

    Sexual selection is assortative mating, and assortative mating is sexual selection.

    Below the fold is a listing of the living people mentioned in Abbany's piece. How many of their romantic partners have IQs <100? Flunked college, HotOrNot <5, flip burgers at McDonalds, have a rap sheet, hail from Fishtown or one of its EU analogs?

    50:1 odds that these elitists' revealed preferences are a striking endorsement of Darwin's ideas.

    Zulfikar Abbany
    Janet Browne, science historian at Harvard
    Jeremy DeSilva, Dartmouth anthropologist
    Augustin Fuentes, Princeton anthropologist
    Holly Dunsworth, U. Rhode Island anthropologist
    Claire Reymond, scientific editor at China University of Geosciences

    "A Most Interesting Problem" contributors:
    Jeremy DeSilva, editor
    Janet Browne
    Alice Roberts
    Suzana Herculana-Houzel
    Brian Hare
    Johannes Haile-Selassie [sic]
    Kristina Killgrove
    John Hawks [!!]
    Augustin Fuentes
    Michael J. Ryan
    Holly Dunsworth
    Ann Gibbons

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Calvin Hobbes

    John Hawks [!!]

    I tried to find out what Hawks wrote about in his contribution to the book. The first page of his piece is here:

    https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780691210810-010/html

    I can’t tell where his piece is going, though.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    @Calvin Hobbes

    I saw him endorsing some pro BLM statement by what I think some black administrator at UW- Madison ( his university and employer ) on Twitter sometime back in June. At some point he must have decided it was too much trouble fighting with the tiny minority in his profession and just caved into pressure.

  85. “(Darwin) could do better today because he would benefit from all the rest of us who are doing better than he was!” wrote Dunsworth in an email to DW.”

    This gemstone – the stupidest take on anything I’ve seen this week – sums up the Wokey Supremacy: Morality is hierarchy and we are the hier part.

  86. The Left is obviously conflicted about Darwin. Sure, there is that natural selections stuff and Darwin’s not too hidden atheism, which is all to the good. There is also that pesky Social Darwinism (of which Darwin was the first advocate), with that stuff about favored races wiping out the unfavored ones. That sort of philosophy should draw condemnation from everyone, since it is a less than subtle justification for war and genocide. The fact that the Left has heretofore been reluctant to do so suggests that war and mass murder is acceptable to them and history bears this out.

  87. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob McX

    I disagree on your 1st paragraph because government and Big-Biz will become as one anyway. They can call it something else, but Communism under any other name smells just as sour.

    I agree completely on your 2nd though. It took 40-70 years (China/Russia) to eradicate the Commies, and that was with the outside influence of the West, including America and Ronald Reagan. You are quite right that with the demographic change, there is no such thing as reversal, and whether Communist, Socialist or supposedly a Democracy, who cares? It won't be us anyway.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Even Marxists don’t believe in Communism anymore.

    They’ll never return to thinking that the government should control all production.

    What they want is Brazil 2.0 but with complete social control.

    Basically turn the world into one big Brazilian market dominated by multi-national corps and then re-write history so all races contributed equally.

    It sounds crazy but look at how Biden was saying that a Black man invented the light bulb. Then left resents Whites in both the past and the present. In their minds White people unfairly shadow everyone else and outbreeding them isn’t enough.

    We even had a leftist here talk about how race probably exists but we need to push for a multi-racial star trek anyways. High level leftists know that they have to lie about race and that communal ownership was a total failure. They still see Marx as a guide for change however.

  88. Darwin … was onto something

    Stone the crows. Knock me down with a feather. It takes a woman to come up with an insight like that.

  89. @Steve Sailer
    @nokangaroos

    Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians whom Darwin met on the Beagle's voyage are left these days.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Jonathan Mason

    Not surprising if beating out the brains of a small child for dropping a basket full of eggs, as described by Darwin in Tierra del Fuego, was a common form of child-raising in that population.

  90. It was “men and patriarchal traditions” that prevented female scientists from cutting through in Darwin’s time.

    This is an important part of Woke Theology. Whenever a white man achieved anything, it is only because he stopped women or people of color making comparable advances. Except slavery and colonialism, which the white man did all on his own.

    In fact, the opposite is true. The things that other races did without white help always include slavery and colonialism, which were universal.

    Europeans are instructed that they are uniquely evil, and must share their countries with their moral superiors – for example, Turks and Arabs. In fact, both those races practised slavery and colonialism for centuries longer than white Europeans.

    And of course, the Woke do not believe in hereditary or collective guilt – except for white people.

    How on earth did such bad ideas gain so much traction in the modern world?

  91. @nokangaroos
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying "you know what you can do with that crap"
    (though in somewhat more Victorian - flowery - prose); Marx got one of these also -
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    - Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked -
    shocked I tell you - his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches - like the
    Europids currently - to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    ... but the rest is too cogent to be left standing - this is not who we are :P

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anon, @James N. Kennett, @RonaldB

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying “you know what you can do with that crap”
    (though in somewhat more Victorian – flowery – prose); Marx got one of these also –
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    This is a more likely explanation for the “Dear Sir”. It is doubtful that Darwin himself wrote the letter, though he might have signed it. It is even less likely that he read the book.

    • Agree: nokangaroos
  92. The thing about human evolution is that it is very long-term proposition, and that humans breed rather slowly and randomly, as opposed to say dogs or cats which can be deliberately bred and which reproduce several generations within a few years.

    Keynes said that in the long run we are all dead, but human race development proceeds over multiple generations.

    In terms of modern thinking, the process on American plantations by which owners and overseers father children with black slave women would be seen as rape and exploitation and so on, but from a long term perspective it could be seen in terms of black women succeeding in entering their genes into the sexual selection lottery.

    In Dawkins’ seminal book The Selfish Gene published in 1976, the central theme is that the unit of evolution is the gene, which does everything it can to reproduce itself in the next generation. So for example, if a gene for being able to run fast can associate itself with a gene that makes a young woman look very sexy, then it has a better chance of moving forward in the Game of Life.

    Or look at the story of The Sound of Music. The pretty young woman with the beautiful singing voice is about to enter a convent and take vows of lifelong chastity, but… ta-ra, she swerves at the last minute and accepts as a mate a man who has already proved himself to be capable of fathering multiple children with musical ability.

    That is the underlying story, but we shield the archetypal myths with our social conventions.

    Even Darwin himself may not have been 100% aware of what it he was revealing, but it took Rogers and Hammerstein to come along 100 years later and give flesh to evolutionary stories such as The Sound of Music, or South Pacific, which dealt with intergenerational and assortative mating in a more easily digestible form that you could sing along to.

  93. “Take as examples the US and UK, where we see radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that. It’s the product of systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives,” says Fuentes.

    In some parts of Glasgow, Scotland, the life expectancy (for white Scots) is lower than for people in Somalia.

    There is plenty of material online about Glasgow’s low life expectancy; but search engines do not want to find the comparisons sometimes made with Somalia. They are much more eager to show you material about the experiences of Somali immigrants to Glasgow. This is a sign of the times.

  94. But Holly Dunsworth is less forgiving.

    “He could do better today because he would benefit from all the rest of us who are doing better than he was!” wrote Dunsworth in an email to DW.

    “One of the threads in the book is to [think] about the delight Darwin might take in knowing what we know today. But I’m not comfortable or interested in imagining such personal things about him and that’s maybe because I’m angry with him and don’t want to give him a part of me,” says Dunsworth.

    No sex differences there!

    I remain perplexed by who anyone could seriously buy into any of the woke “gender” garbage.

    The race thing is different. Crystal clear if one actually has any serious experience with different races. But lots of good-whites (unlike Darwin) really don’t–maybe with a small set of Asians. So those folks can imagine “culture” takes care of it. And if they simply don’t understand natural selection–their brain just does not run toward logical or mathematical models–then it’s possible to sincerely believe utter nonsense about race.

    But sex? Do these people not have actual sexual relationships? Even so, did they not go to high school?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @AnotherDad

    Crystal clear if one actually has any serious experience with different races. But lots of good-whites (unlike Darwin) really don’t–maybe with a small set of Asians. So those folks can imagine “culture” takes care of it. And if they simply don’t understand natural selection–their brain just does not run toward logical or mathematical models–then it’s possible to sincerely believe utter nonsense about race.

    I would add there is also the argument by authority and that works on most Whites.

    People have a hard time with the possibility of academia being wrong. If thousands of smart scientists say that race doesn't exist then it must be true.....or at least mostly true.....right?

    It's too unnerving for the possibility of entire institutions telling a giant fib. Even conservatives that know the colleges are biased have a hard time with this. You can point out the lack of logic in liberal arguments regarding race and they will still quietly assume there must be something missing. This one person can't possibly be right and an entire institution wrong.

    It can get pretty amusing when this type of thinking is applied to the real world where results matter. The police can identify your race through DNA but most Whites and especially liberal Whites would doubt that is possible. I've seen a case where the MSM described the suspect from an attack but didn't mention that the racial composite was taken from DNA. That would go against the narrative of race being a social construct.

  95. @Bardon Kaldian
    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world & .... the Darwin problem solved.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @frontier, @Paperback Writer, @Alt Right Moderate

    No it won’t. It’s here to stay, and it’s in your face, until you remove it.

  96. “There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox.

    “Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man.

    “It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”

    Darwin himself had 10 children with his wife who was his first cousin, and two of them died at birth. Darwin was considerably concerned that his children would grow up with disabilities caused by inbreeding, but he need not have worried as several of them became distinguished scientists and his descendants have done just fine.

    In spite of his theoretical remarks, I doubt whether he would have been an antivaxxer today.

    He was extremely grief-stricken when his 10 year old daughter died, and he was humane enough to realize that other people had the same feelings about their families, regardless of their fitness to survive.

  97. How Long Until They Come for Darwin?

    They’re coming for Dr Seuss.

    VA School System Drops Dr. Seuss, Claims Books are Fraught With ‘Racial Undertones’ After Left-Wing Group Promotes Removal

    I’d hate to see him cancelled, but it might be worth it if FDR goes down with him:

    [MORE]


  98. Darwin had a personal horror of slavery and was from a family of well-known abolitionists. There is also the idea that he reached his conclusion that all the races of man were of the same species as a way to scientifically express the idea of human equality that he may have found attractive for other reasons. Perhaps this, along with the general usefulness of his ideas (for how else, without God, to explain the origin of species?), will keep him from being cancelled. He’s not so easily replaced.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    A great irony is that not only did Darwin hope that his theory of a common origin of species would be a rebuttal to racial ideas, but the strongest rebuttal to Darwin on this point came from Stephen Gould. Darwin had always given a theory of incremental evolution which proceeds very slowly at a more or less constant pace. Gould introduced the idea that an equilibrium may set in within a biological system much like a market equilibrium and when this happens the pace of evolution may be slowed drastically. When that equilibrium is punctured by a flux of circumstances in the environment, there is the potential for evolution to temporarily speed up at a much quicker pace.

    Gould's model is much more consistent with the idea that significant differences could have evolved between racial groups within just the last 60 or so millennia. Since most biologists seem to agree that we probably do all have common human ancestors from about 60 or 70 millennia ago, the Darwinian model makes it seem unlikely that any really serious differences could have evolved within just that time. But with Gould's theory one has the perfect explanation as to how such differences could have appeared so quickly. Gould went to his end cursing at the ramifications which his own work had shown.

  99. @anon
    @BB753

    Antioinette Blackwell was a Congregationalist. Most of those churches eventually wound up as Unitarian. She went to Oberlin which apparently was a weak spot 150 years ago.

    Replies: @BB753

    Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity, like Jehova’s Witnesses. They’re not Christian.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @anon
    @BB753

    Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity,

    By definition. So?

    Replies: @BB753

  100. @AnotherDad

    But Holly Dunsworth is less forgiving.

    “He could do better today because he would benefit from all the rest of us who are doing better than he was!” wrote Dunsworth in an email to DW.

    “One of the threads in the book is to [think] about the delight Darwin might take in knowing what we know today. But I’m not comfortable or interested in imagining such personal things about him and that’s maybe because I’m angry with him and don’t want to give him a part of me,” says Dunsworth.
     
    No sex differences there!


    I remain perplexed by who anyone could seriously buy into any of the woke "gender" garbage.

    The race thing is different. Crystal clear if one actually has any serious experience with different races. But lots of good-whites (unlike Darwin) really don't--maybe with a small set of Asians. So those folks can imagine "culture" takes care of it. And if they simply don't understand natural selection--their brain just does not run toward logical or mathematical models--then it's possible to sincerely believe utter nonsense about race.

    But sex? Do these people not have actual sexual relationships? Even so, did they not go to high school?

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Crystal clear if one actually has any serious experience with different races. But lots of good-whites (unlike Darwin) really don’t–maybe with a small set of Asians. So those folks can imagine “culture” takes care of it. And if they simply don’t understand natural selection–their brain just does not run toward logical or mathematical models–then it’s possible to sincerely believe utter nonsense about race.

    I would add there is also the argument by authority and that works on most Whites.

    People have a hard time with the possibility of academia being wrong. If thousands of smart scientists say that race doesn’t exist then it must be true…..or at least mostly true…..right?

    It’s too unnerving for the possibility of entire institutions telling a giant fib. Even conservatives that know the colleges are biased have a hard time with this. You can point out the lack of logic in liberal arguments regarding race and they will still quietly assume there must be something missing. This one person can’t possibly be right and an entire institution wrong.

    It can get pretty amusing when this type of thinking is applied to the real world where results matter. The police can identify your race through DNA but most Whites and especially liberal Whites would doubt that is possible. I’ve seen a case where the MSM described the suspect from an attack but didn’t mention that the racial composite was taken from DNA. That would go against the narrative of race being a social construct.

  101. @Alden
    @BB753

    Pussy whipped nerds submissive to bullying shrew wives often quote St Paul. It’s a well known pattern.

    Replies: @BB753

    No, pussy submissive nerds usually quote some BS New Age or Buddhist wisdom.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @BB753

    Christian pussy whipped nerds married to shrewish bullies always quite St Paul.

    Replies: @BB753

  102. @BB753
    @anon

    Unitarians don't believe in the Trinity, like Jehova's Witnesses. They're not Christian.

    Replies: @anon

    Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity,

    By definition. So?

    • Replies: @BB753
    @anon

    Well, they're not Christians. You can't be a Christian and not believe in the Trinity. It's part of the Nicene Creed.

  103. @mousey
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I don't know. I kind of like Darwin's ironic salutation in lieu of your sarcasm. Either one is pretty good but Darwin's is clever and more subtle (irony usually is) and seems to still be confounding the over educated today.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    in lieu of your sarcasm

    My sarcasm? That hale, convivial greeting was from Emily Poast, my good bitch!

  104. @anon
    @BB753

    Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity,

    By definition. So?

    Replies: @BB753

    Well, they’re not Christians. You can’t be a Christian and not believe in the Trinity. It’s part of the Nicene Creed.

  105. 3—2—1…

    Uh, what’s the Current Year again?

  106. Anonymous[112] • Disclaimer says:

    Just a lot of highfalutin mumbo-jumbo from a bunch of intellectual lightweights with the emotional maturity of a typical 14 year old girl trying to sound smart.
    Note the heavy use of childish leftist jargon by all the interviewees: “problematic” “privileged” “patriarchal” “systemic racism” “wow”

    Browne- Darwin was “problematic”

    DaSilva- “Wow was [Darwin] off… did he just have these deep biases as a privileged British man?”

    Dunsworth- “patriarchal traditions”

    Fuentes- “systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives”

    • Agree: Alden, nokangaroos
  107. “Take as examples the US and UK, where we see radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that. It’s the product of systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives,” says Fuentes.

    Do you really think Fuentes has never heard of the Hispanic Paradox?:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/hispanic-paradox

    In contrast, Hispanics often have better health than Whites or AAs despite their SES. This is known in the health and mortality literature as the Hispanic Paradox. Explanations for this paradox include the presumption that generally only healthy people are capable of migrating, thus giving US Hispanics a health advantage. Other explanations include strong family and social ties, psychological and physical resilience, and individual behavior (Ruiz, Steffen, & Smith, 2013), and Hispanics live longer. Current life tables show that a Hispanic baby born today is likely to live 2.3 years longer than a White child, and this is the same for both males and females.

    • Replies: @fnn
    @fnn

    https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-02-12/hispanic-paradox-in-health-extends-beyond-us-borders


    Latin Americans are less likely to suffer an early death than whites in the U.S.


    LATIN AMERICANS ARE less likely to die prematurely than non-Hispanic whites in the U.S. – whether they live in the country or not, a new study suggests.

    Researchers have long theorized that a longer life expectancy among Latinos in the U.S. – despite often facing socioeconomic disadvantages – could be driven in part by a "healthy immigrant effect," meaning healthier people may be more likely to immigrate to the U.S. than those in poorer health. But the new study, published Wednesday in JAMA Network Open, suggests "there may be a broader Latin American paradox" that extends far beyond U.S. borders.
     
  108. @fnn

    “Take as examples the US and UK, where we see radically different mortality and morbidity, infection and death rates, based on whether you’re brown or not. Now there is not a single biological reason for that. It’s the product of systemic racism creating unequal bodies and unequal lives,” says Fuentes.
     
    Do you really think Fuentes has never heard of the Hispanic Paradox?:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/hispanic-paradox

    In contrast, Hispanics often have better health than Whites or AAs despite their SES. This is known in the health and mortality literature as the Hispanic Paradox. Explanations for this paradox include the presumption that generally only healthy people are capable of migrating, thus giving US Hispanics a health advantage. Other explanations include strong family and social ties, psychological and physical resilience, and individual behavior (Ruiz, Steffen, & Smith, 2013), and Hispanics live longer. Current life tables show that a Hispanic baby born today is likely to live 2.3 years longer than a White child, and this is the same for both males and females.
     

    Replies: @fnn

    https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-02-12/hispanic-paradox-in-health-extends-beyond-us-borders

    Latin Americans are less likely to suffer an early death than whites in the U.S.

    LATIN AMERICANS ARE less likely to die prematurely than non-Hispanic whites in the U.S. – whether they live in the country or not, a new study suggests.

    Researchers have long theorized that a longer life expectancy among Latinos in the U.S. – despite often facing socioeconomic disadvantages – could be driven in part by a “healthy immigrant effect,” meaning healthier people may be more likely to immigrate to the U.S. than those in poorer health. But the new study, published Wednesday in JAMA Network Open, suggests “there may be a broader Latin American paradox” that extends far beyond U.S. borders.

  109. @Anon
    @Rob McX


    When I say it’s easier to undo the wrongs done by communism, I mean mostly that the communist regimes didn’t (for the most part) engage in population replacement. When the system collapsed in the late 20th century, the Eastern bloc countries were demographically much the same as they had been before communism.
     
    Population replacement or, if not replacement, the atomization of the White ethny or destruction of the White nation-state, may in fact have been the motivation of the original communists (Bolsheviks). Apparently, in the decades after the revolution, some power was wrested away from them by more nationalistic communists.

    Replies: @G. Poulin

    Yes. Unfortunately for the old Bolsheviks, it turned out that Stalin hated Jews almost as much as Hitler did. Surprise !

    • Replies: @Alden
    @G. Poulin

    If Stalin hated Jews, why did he marry Jews?

    Replies: @BB753

  110. @Chrisnonymous
    @J.Ross


    * That’s what prawn is now, it is objectively infinitely better than plopping a camera to record animal behavior Attenborough-style
     
    You only say that because the Attenborough-style is ubiquitus. Your contention is like saying that a commentary on sport is better than watching the Olympics.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    >the Olympics

    Excellent example, the Olympics are mostly the most boring, overhyped, unwatchable and unwatched form of televised sports.

  111. @nokangaroos
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Darwin used to be sent books by the cartload, from every crétin under the sun
    (to include Marx), asking for his opinion and/or endorsement.
    I assume he had form letters printed saying "you know what you can do with that crap"
    (though in somewhat more Victorian - flowery - prose); Marx got one of these also -
    Darwin would have considered it gauche not to answer and thank everybody.

    - Where he erred catastrophically was his prediction the Congoid and Amerind would shortly go the way of the dodo as they were so grossly maladapted;
    the thought that only reproductive success matters would have shocked -
    shocked I tell you - his contemporaries
    (iirc Montesquieu was the first prophet of Idiocracy).
    He also incompletely understood sexual selection; any species that switches - like the
    Europids currently - to exclusive intraspecific selection is doomed.

    ... but the rest is too cogent to be left standing - this is not who we are :P

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anon, @James N. Kennett, @RonaldB

    You got it. While sexual selection can play some role in adaptation, environmental presses also play an independent role. A Scandinavian unable to cooperate with his fellows in the winter would not simply be unable to pass his seed to a willing female; he would freeze or starve to death or be caste out from the group as a useless mouth to feed.

    Given Darwin’s breadth of exploration on species differences, I would not take the word of emotional partisans that Darwin used sexual selection as the mechanism to explain all racial or group differences. In fact, modern research has given a plethora of environmental presses resulting in different racial characteristics, such as the ability to absorb vitamin D. Ed Dutton, the Jolly Heretic, can humorously take phony, emotional “science” reporters apart when they substitute their emotional states for scientific findings. ccccc

  112. Darwin’s Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

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

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    , @John Johnson
    @Paperback Writer

    Darwin’s Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

    Well he believed we should abandon the theory of evolution for the sake of Christianity and racial egalitarianism.

    Today a dishonest form of evolution is used to attack Christianity while trying to preserve racial egalitarianism.

    So I guess he got half of what he wanted.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  113. @Paperback Writer
    Darwin's Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

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

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @John Johnson

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don’t know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with “My Struggle,” but that’s the kind of thing he saw coming.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Steve Sailer


    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism.
     
    WJB wouldn’t be able to handle the Hyperborean Thymos in this clip ;) :

    https://twitter.com/SkiingIncel/status/1350509759670198275
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Steve Sailer

    He lived to 1925, so no. Hitler was still in beer halls then.

    His son WJR, Jr. lived to 1978!

    WJB was maligned in Inherit The Wind. I'd love to see a realistic movie about his prairie populism, but I think that the time for that is either long past, or 30 years too soon.

    , @Sean
    @Steve Sailer

    Schopenhauer was Hitler's philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels's diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late, probably because he'd decided on a war of conquest.
    ----


    In 1855, Herman Melville published the novella Benito Cereno, which follows Amasa Delano, an American sea captain who answers a call for help from a battered ship off the coast of Chile, in the South Pacific. As he observes the strange social interactions between the vessel’s white crew and black slave “cargo,” Delano—a liberal opposed, in theory, to slavery—finds himself yearning for a servant to closely attend to his needs the way the African Babo seems to dote upon his master, the Spanish captain Benito Cereno.

    But then—and here’s a SPOILER ALERT for the ages—it turns out that the Africans are actually in charge, having overcome their captors, killed their owner, and taken control of the ship more than 50 days earlier. They’re merely performing the roles of slaves—with Cereno playing along in fear for his life—in order to fool Delano into handing over some much-needed supplies.
     
    Melville travelled in the Antebellum South and seems to have thought the slaveholder lifestyle would end battlefield. Gambling and dueling were a preparation for being soldiers. Nietzsche's personal hero was Cesare Borgia.

    ------
    If Sub Saharan Africans and Europeans had a different origin they would have to be accounted a different species even if there looked identical to whites in every way. Resistance to giving blacks full rights reached a crescendo not from in tandem with the huge rise in profits to be made from cotton and the suitability of blacks for working the best land, which was often malarial. The greatest rise in the value profitability of cotton, which historically had been les remunerative than rice cultivation happened just before the Civil War. That is also when the interpretation of the Bible in the South began to be popularised.
    https://youtu.be/N4fNp5cl1eY?t=1994

    If there there is only one race the why do blacks and whites look so different? Darwin used sexual selection to explain the European and African human races as a diverging from original unity an attempt to further the emancipation of blacks (see Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins).

    Going by Darwin’s second book, he thought the black-white racial differences arose through a different sex being the focus of sexual selection. In the case of Europeans he clearly suggests that the focus was on women, noting that European women were considered extremely attractive by men of all races. Darwin said the standards of female beauty are universal and the early the white travelers in Darkest Africa and local tribesmen were in complete agreement about which women (African or European) were the best looking. Psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa got hauled over the coals in 2011 when he said that black women, when rated objectively, were less physically attractive that European women. It is often forgotten that he also said that black men were more physically attractive than European men.

    Replies: @ic1000, @anon

    , @John Johnson
    @Steve Sailer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don’t know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with “My Struggle,” but that’s the kind of thing he saw coming.

    He didn't but it was part of WW1. There were some very influential pro-war scientists that viewed German militarism as healthy for the population. Their arguments were Darwinian in origin.

    It's not talked about in schools because it goes against the liberal narrative that enlightenment is always good and European wars were all fought by right-wing Bad White Christians.

    https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/social_darwinism

    , @Ray P
    @Steve Sailer

    It's funny because Nietzsche derided and scoffed at Darwin although Daniel C. Dennett tried combining the two again in Darwin's Dangerous Idea.

    , @anon
    @Steve Sailer


    I don’t know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with “My Struggle,” but that’s the kind of thing he saw coming.
     
    Have you read My Struggle?
  114. “He clearly lay out a reputation of the biological division of people into lineages, and then he gives some cultural biased assertion about… ‘Yeah, yeah, there is all that, but we know that these people are not as advanced, they’re not as smart and they can’t survive,’”

    Can it really be the case that The former chair of the Notre Dame dept of Anthrology, a full Professor at princeton and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences doesn’t know the meaning of “Reputation”?

  115. @BB753
    @Alden

    No, pussy submissive nerds usually quote some BS New Age or Buddhist wisdom.

    Replies: @Alden

    Christian pussy whipped nerds married to shrewish bullies always quite St Paul.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Alden

    OK, I'll take your word for it.

  116. @G. Poulin
    @Anon

    Yes. Unfortunately for the old Bolsheviks, it turned out that Stalin hated Jews almost as much as Hitler did. Surprise !

    Replies: @Alden

    If Stalin hated Jews, why did he marry Jews?

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Alden

    Stalin married a Jewess. Perhaps he only hated the male side of the species. Also, marrying your enemies' women is an old tradition of warfare. The ultimate proof of victory and humiliation.

  117. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism.

    WJB wouldn’t be able to handle the Hyperborean Thymos in this clip 😉 :

    • LOL: Gabe Ruth
  118. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    He lived to 1925, so no. Hitler was still in beer halls then.

    His son WJR, Jr. lived to 1978!

    WJB was maligned in Inherit The Wind. I’d love to see a realistic movie about his prairie populism, but I think that the time for that is either long past, or 30 years too soon.

  119. @Calvin Hobbes
    @ic1000


    John Hawks [!!]
     
    I tried to find out what Hawks wrote about in his contribution to the book. The first page of his piece is here:

    https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780691210810-010/html

    I can’t tell where his piece is going, though.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

    I saw him endorsing some pro BLM statement by what I think some black administrator at UW- Madison ( his university and employer ) on Twitter sometime back in June. At some point he must have decided it was too much trouble fighting with the tiny minority in his profession and just caved into pressure.

  120. Somewhat OT:

    How long before they come for The Allman Brothers Band?

  121. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    Schopenhauer was Hitler’s philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels’s diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late, probably because he’d decided on a war of conquest.
    —-

    In 1855, Herman Melville published the novella Benito Cereno, which follows Amasa Delano, an American sea captain who answers a call for help from a battered ship off the coast of Chile, in the South Pacific. As he observes the strange social interactions between the vessel’s white crew and black slave “cargo,” Delano—a liberal opposed, in theory, to slavery—finds himself yearning for a servant to closely attend to his needs the way the African Babo seems to dote upon his master, the Spanish captain Benito Cereno.

    But then—and here’s a SPOILER ALERT for the ages—it turns out that the Africans are actually in charge, having overcome their captors, killed their owner, and taken control of the ship more than 50 days earlier. They’re merely performing the roles of slaves—with Cereno playing along in fear for his life—in order to fool Delano into handing over some much-needed supplies.

    Melville travelled in the Antebellum South and seems to have thought the slaveholder lifestyle would end battlefield. Gambling and dueling were a preparation for being soldiers. Nietzsche’s personal hero was Cesare Borgia.

    ——
    If Sub Saharan Africans and Europeans had a different origin they would have to be accounted a different species even if there looked identical to whites in every way. Resistance to giving blacks full rights reached a crescendo not from in tandem with the huge rise in profits to be made from cotton and the suitability of blacks for working the best land, which was often malarial. The greatest rise in the value profitability of cotton, which historically had been les remunerative than rice cultivation happened just before the Civil War. That is also when the interpretation of the Bible in the South began to be popularised.

    If there there is only one race the why do blacks and whites look so different? Darwin used sexual selection to explain the European and African human races as a diverging from original unity an attempt to further the emancipation of blacks (see Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins).

    Going by Darwin’s second book, he thought the black-white racial differences arose through a different sex being the focus of sexual selection. In the case of Europeans he clearly suggests that the focus was on women, noting that European women were considered extremely attractive by men of all races. Darwin said the standards of female beauty are universal and the early the white travelers in Darkest Africa and local tribesmen were in complete agreement about which women (African or European) were the best looking. Psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa got hauled over the coals in 2011 when he said that black women, when rated objectively, were less physically attractive that European women. It is often forgotten that he also said that black men were more physically attractive than European men.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Sean

    Please proofread. Your comment is garbled at key points.

    , @anon
    @Sean


    Schopenhauer was Hitler’s philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels’s diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late,
     
    Are you and Steve opposed to our having heroic outlook of great exploits?

    probably because he’d decided on a war of conquest.
     
    That is a curious way to describe the liberation of German lands and people from foreign occupation.

    Replies: @Sean

  122. @Paperback Writer
    Darwin's Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

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

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @John Johnson

    Darwin’s Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

    Well he believed we should abandon the theory of evolution for the sake of Christianity and racial egalitarianism.

    Today a dishonest form of evolution is used to attack Christianity while trying to preserve racial egalitarianism.

    So I guess he got half of what he wanted.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @John Johnson

    "Racial egalitarianism"

    Nope, it was class. Please remember that the Gilded Age was full of horrific poverty, usually white.

    Look up the word "presentism" and drop the chip.

    You're welcome.

  123. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don’t know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with “My Struggle,” but that’s the kind of thing he saw coming.

    He didn’t but it was part of WW1. There were some very influential pro-war scientists that viewed German militarism as healthy for the population. Their arguments were Darwinian in origin.

    It’s not talked about in schools because it goes against the liberal narrative that enlightenment is always good and European wars were all fought by right-wing Bad White Christians.

    https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/social_darwinism

  124. To be fair, Agassiz was closer to the truth than Darwin, but Darwin was closer in his analysis of his finite number of observations to the analysis of the classicists of the 19th century than Agassiz, who actually understood biology better, was. (The point is, in Darwin’s day, the leading style of science – outside of math – was classical philology. Which, as we now know, was a field that was, even at it’s best, almost always second-rate at Oxford and Cambridge and at the German universities in the 19th century – sorry if you do not know that is true but I know it is true).

    Very very few people know enough about actual biology to know that Darwin always worked from a limited data set, despite his (sort of) impressive claims to lots and lots of data points.

    For example, Agassiz would have been unsurprised by the knowledge of animal behavior (recorded animal behavior) that the ubiquity of Youtube videos of animal behavior have recently made available,

    Darwin would have been surprised.

    Because Agassiz was a first-rate biologist, Darwin was just a chump who gloried in being full of information. Well, we now have more information.

    Yes, yes, I get it, NATURAL SELECTION.

    Big deal. I HAVE SEEN WHICH FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE-INS HAVE LONGER PHONY PANDEMIC LINES THAN OTHER DRIVE-INS that does not make me a genius.

    Think about it. You probably won’t,but you should.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    @very very old statistician

    If this isn't Unamused, I'll eat my hat.

  125. If there there is only one race the why do blacks and whites look so different? Darwin used sexual selection to explain the European and African human races as a diverging from original unity an attempt to further the emancipation of blacks (see Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins)

    That is a leftist fantasy book that tried to re-create Darwin as a racial egalitarian. It actually tries to blame creationism as the cause of racism and our left-wing hero secular Darwin was trying to free us from its chains.

    Yes he was against slavery because he considered it to be inhumane. He didn’t like to see unnecessary suffering caused by humans.

    He also made this quote:
    At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

    If not for the internet the academic left most certainly would have erased that quote from history.

    So I guess it is time to start renaming buildings and tearing down Darwin statutes.

  126. @Bardon Kaldian
    In not so distant future, Wokeness will collapse as swiftly as Marxism in most of the world & .... the Darwin problem solved.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @frontier, @Paperback Writer, @Alt Right Moderate

    It’s likely to break first in those western countries where the economy isn’t strong enough to support a large number of woke parasites. Which is one of the reasons why anti-woke politicians are gaining more support in central and southern Europe.

    Unfortunately, economic wealth in the richer parts of the West is so high that the economy can support plenty of woke hangers on. Hence, the policy of appeasement from most rich white economic elites in the US and Northern Europe.

  127. @ic1000
    @Steve Sailer

    > Not a lot of pure blood descendants of the Tierra Del Fuegians

    Or Australian Aboriginals.

    Replies: @Emblematic

    There’s still lots of Australian Aboriginals around, and their numbers are increasing. Perhaps you’re thinking of Tasmanian Aboriginals. None of them left.

  128. @Alden
    @BB753

    Christian pussy whipped nerds married to shrewish bullies always quite St Paul.

    Replies: @BB753

    OK, I’ll take your word for it.

  129. @Alden
    @G. Poulin

    If Stalin hated Jews, why did he marry Jews?

    Replies: @BB753

    Stalin married a Jewess. Perhaps he only hated the male side of the species. Also, marrying your enemies’ women is an old tradition of warfare. The ultimate proof of victory and humiliation.

  130. @Stonewall Jackson
    You should see what the "Science" community has done to James Watson.. guess they don't credit him for discovering DNA anymore... instead they say it is a Swiss scientist in 1860... probably because they canceled him due to his thought crimes. Which amounted to having the audacity to mention the bell curve and maybe there is a genetic component to intelligence. I dunno... Jews have high IQs generally when we count up the score and boy are they inbred, with their marrying inside their religion..

    So... I have white skin, or blue eyes or a hairy ass... which is heredity. But my intelligence or any trait related to sex is not heredity. I can be a blue haired manatee if I want, non binary etc?

    Scientist who are liberal douches for the most part, are all for Darwin until it hits their relgion.

    Replies: @nokangaroos

    Watson and Crick did not “discover” DNA any more than Kekulé invented benzene.
    They “merely” resolved its first-order structure (“double helix”) by x-ray diffraction*
    and kicked off a quantum leap in the biosciences.

    *Max v. Laue 1912, Nobel 1914; v. Laue BTW was instrumental in rehabilitating
    German physics after German Physics … it´s a sobering thought that once upon a time even the antifascists had brains 🙁

  131. @Dr. Robert Morgan
    Darwin had a personal horror of slavery and was from a family of well-known abolitionists. There is also the idea that he reached his conclusion that all the races of man were of the same species as a way to scientifically express the idea of human equality that he may have found attractive for other reasons. Perhaps this, along with the general usefulness of his ideas (for how else, without God, to explain the origin of species?), will keep him from being cancelled. He's not so easily replaced.

    Replies: @Patrick McNally

    A great irony is that not only did Darwin hope that his theory of a common origin of species would be a rebuttal to racial ideas, but the strongest rebuttal to Darwin on this point came from Stephen Gould. Darwin had always given a theory of incremental evolution which proceeds very slowly at a more or less constant pace. Gould introduced the idea that an equilibrium may set in within a biological system much like a market equilibrium and when this happens the pace of evolution may be slowed drastically. When that equilibrium is punctured by a flux of circumstances in the environment, there is the potential for evolution to temporarily speed up at a much quicker pace.

    Gould’s model is much more consistent with the idea that significant differences could have evolved between racial groups within just the last 60 or so millennia. Since most biologists seem to agree that we probably do all have common human ancestors from about 60 or 70 millennia ago, the Darwinian model makes it seem unlikely that any really serious differences could have evolved within just that time. But with Gould’s theory one has the perfect explanation as to how such differences could have appeared so quickly. Gould went to his end cursing at the ramifications which his own work had shown.

  132. @Sean
    @Steve Sailer

    Schopenhauer was Hitler's philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels's diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late, probably because he'd decided on a war of conquest.
    ----


    In 1855, Herman Melville published the novella Benito Cereno, which follows Amasa Delano, an American sea captain who answers a call for help from a battered ship off the coast of Chile, in the South Pacific. As he observes the strange social interactions between the vessel’s white crew and black slave “cargo,” Delano—a liberal opposed, in theory, to slavery—finds himself yearning for a servant to closely attend to his needs the way the African Babo seems to dote upon his master, the Spanish captain Benito Cereno.

    But then—and here’s a SPOILER ALERT for the ages—it turns out that the Africans are actually in charge, having overcome their captors, killed their owner, and taken control of the ship more than 50 days earlier. They’re merely performing the roles of slaves—with Cereno playing along in fear for his life—in order to fool Delano into handing over some much-needed supplies.
     
    Melville travelled in the Antebellum South and seems to have thought the slaveholder lifestyle would end battlefield. Gambling and dueling were a preparation for being soldiers. Nietzsche's personal hero was Cesare Borgia.

    ------
    If Sub Saharan Africans and Europeans had a different origin they would have to be accounted a different species even if there looked identical to whites in every way. Resistance to giving blacks full rights reached a crescendo not from in tandem with the huge rise in profits to be made from cotton and the suitability of blacks for working the best land, which was often malarial. The greatest rise in the value profitability of cotton, which historically had been les remunerative than rice cultivation happened just before the Civil War. That is also when the interpretation of the Bible in the South began to be popularised.
    https://youtu.be/N4fNp5cl1eY?t=1994

    If there there is only one race the why do blacks and whites look so different? Darwin used sexual selection to explain the European and African human races as a diverging from original unity an attempt to further the emancipation of blacks (see Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins).

    Going by Darwin’s second book, he thought the black-white racial differences arose through a different sex being the focus of sexual selection. In the case of Europeans he clearly suggests that the focus was on women, noting that European women were considered extremely attractive by men of all races. Darwin said the standards of female beauty are universal and the early the white travelers in Darkest Africa and local tribesmen were in complete agreement about which women (African or European) were the best looking. Psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa got hauled over the coals in 2011 when he said that black women, when rated objectively, were less physically attractive that European women. It is often forgotten that he also said that black men were more physically attractive than European men.

    Replies: @ic1000, @anon

    Please proofread. Your comment is garbled at key points.

  133. @John Johnson
    @Paperback Writer

    Darwin’s Descent of Man was exactly what disturbed folks like William Jennings Bryan. I think people should take a second look at WJB, not because he was right about that, but he got a lot of other things right, and maybe his time is coming again.

    Well he believed we should abandon the theory of evolution for the sake of Christianity and racial egalitarianism.

    Today a dishonest form of evolution is used to attack Christianity while trying to preserve racial egalitarianism.

    So I guess he got half of what he wanted.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    “Racial egalitarianism”

    Nope, it was class. Please remember that the Gilded Age was full of horrific poverty, usually white.

    Look up the word “presentism” and drop the chip.

    You’re welcome.

  134. @prime noticer
    has anybody noticed that almost all of the women who actually do accomplish something that is important or valuable, are european women? not even jewish women most of the time. east asian women do almost nothing important ever.

    i assume if this is ever noticed in a larger audience, it will be taken as further evidence of white supreeemism or something along those lines. i figure most smart jewish women spend their lives on some sort of activism, which is always a direct attack on european society, and produces only things of negative value, so that doesn't leave much room to reach high achievement in anything constructive. outside of a chemistry or physics lab, which is where their few real accomplishments have been, they seem to have no positive effect on society at all.

    Replies: @Ray P

  135. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    It’s funny because Nietzsche derided and scoffed at Darwin although Daniel C. Dennett tried combining the two again in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea.

  136. @Steve Sailer
    @Paperback Writer

    WJ Bryan worried that Darwinism was merging with Nietzscheanism. I don't know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with "My Struggle," but that's the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Paperback Writer, @Sean, @John Johnson, @Ray P, @anon

    I don’t know if he lived long enough to become aware of Hitler doing exactly that with “My Struggle,” but that’s the kind of thing he saw coming.

    Have you read My Struggle?

  137. anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean
    @Steve Sailer

    Schopenhauer was Hitler's philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels's diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late, probably because he'd decided on a war of conquest.
    ----


    In 1855, Herman Melville published the novella Benito Cereno, which follows Amasa Delano, an American sea captain who answers a call for help from a battered ship off the coast of Chile, in the South Pacific. As he observes the strange social interactions between the vessel’s white crew and black slave “cargo,” Delano—a liberal opposed, in theory, to slavery—finds himself yearning for a servant to closely attend to his needs the way the African Babo seems to dote upon his master, the Spanish captain Benito Cereno.

    But then—and here’s a SPOILER ALERT for the ages—it turns out that the Africans are actually in charge, having overcome their captors, killed their owner, and taken control of the ship more than 50 days earlier. They’re merely performing the roles of slaves—with Cereno playing along in fear for his life—in order to fool Delano into handing over some much-needed supplies.
     
    Melville travelled in the Antebellum South and seems to have thought the slaveholder lifestyle would end battlefield. Gambling and dueling were a preparation for being soldiers. Nietzsche's personal hero was Cesare Borgia.

    ------
    If Sub Saharan Africans and Europeans had a different origin they would have to be accounted a different species even if there looked identical to whites in every way. Resistance to giving blacks full rights reached a crescendo not from in tandem with the huge rise in profits to be made from cotton and the suitability of blacks for working the best land, which was often malarial. The greatest rise in the value profitability of cotton, which historically had been les remunerative than rice cultivation happened just before the Civil War. That is also when the interpretation of the Bible in the South began to be popularised.
    https://youtu.be/N4fNp5cl1eY?t=1994

    If there there is only one race the why do blacks and whites look so different? Darwin used sexual selection to explain the European and African human races as a diverging from original unity an attempt to further the emancipation of blacks (see Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins).

    Going by Darwin’s second book, he thought the black-white racial differences arose through a different sex being the focus of sexual selection. In the case of Europeans he clearly suggests that the focus was on women, noting that European women were considered extremely attractive by men of all races. Darwin said the standards of female beauty are universal and the early the white travelers in Darkest Africa and local tribesmen were in complete agreement about which women (African or European) were the best looking. Psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa got hauled over the coals in 2011 when he said that black women, when rated objectively, were less physically attractive that European women. It is often forgotten that he also said that black men were more physically attractive than European men.

    Replies: @ic1000, @anon

    Schopenhauer was Hitler’s philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels’s diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late,

    Are you and Steve opposed to our having heroic outlook of great exploits?

    probably because he’d decided on a war of conquest.

    That is a curious way to describe the liberation of German lands and people from foreign occupation.

    • Replies: @Sean
    @anon

    Nietzsche's idea was to be one's own source of value; through great exploits in which existence was deliberately put at risk, contempt for all concerns with utility and self preservation would be expressed.


    That is a curious way to describe the liberation of German lands and people from foreign occupation.
     
    https://i.imgur.com/uSCGuzf.jpg
  138. They can topple his statue, but his spirit lives on, at every exposed live electrical high voltage junction, every steep precipice, marked or no, every ocean shoreline where there’s ‘sneaker waves’, every cheerfully disregarded operator’s manual, every case of driver fatigue…every piece of bad road in a rainstorm next to a dropoff or deep ditch in a 55MPH zone..every neglected piece of equipment, every liquor bottle, every body of water over 3′ deep, every distracting smartphone app that encourages users to do stupid @#$% whether the developers intended it or not(Pokemon, HOW DARE YOU!?!?!!)…he’s waiting….FOR YOU. MUahahaaaahhaaaaa….

  139. According to this post, Darwin did not believe in ‘favored species” when it came to humans, but Huxley and other social Darwinists changed “Origin of the Species” after his death:
    https://www.darkmoon.me/2018/demonizing-darwin/

    That is, Darwin was a Deist, a believer in God as the Creator. Now, “they” will REALLY come after Darwin!

  140. @anon
    @Sean


    Schopenhauer was Hitler’s philosophical inspiration until years after he came to power. Goebbels’s diary reveled that Hitler started to talk about Nietzsche and the need for a heroic outlook of great exploits quite late,
     
    Are you and Steve opposed to our having heroic outlook of great exploits?

    probably because he’d decided on a war of conquest.
     
    That is a curious way to describe the liberation of German lands and people from foreign occupation.

    Replies: @Sean

    Nietzsche’s idea was to be one’s own source of value; through great exploits in which existence was deliberately put at risk, contempt for all concerns with utility and self preservation would be expressed.

    That is a curious way to describe the liberation of German lands and people from foreign occupation.

    • LOL: Gabe Ruth
  141. “The book’s editor, Jeremy DeSilva, says that ‘knowing what we know today,’ Darwin would have written differently.”

    But DeSilva and his ilk know nothing. They substitute political passion for knowledge.

    Knowledge about the human things tends to collapse into the sociology of knowledge.

  142. Link at #139 is to a malware trap!

  143. @J.Ross
    @J.Ross

    Not to force Mr S to ban me or to invoke Canadian Government Sanctioned Manitou Frost, or Mistress De Avila, or Sierra Extrajudicial-Execution,* or Malignant Imp or Daimyo Miki You So Fine, You So Fine You Blow My Mind, but for the Observers.

    https://www.xmegadrive.com/videos/eva-de-vil-a-homewrecking-mini-clip/

    Replies: @J.Ross

    I did not post the replied-to comment at 6:26 GMT (the link is not work safe), and am going to be reviewing my online security insofar as it exists, and sending Steve (whom I never call Mr S) a check for his trouble. I would strongly suggest deleting that comment.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @J.Ross

    There you are you completely spineless sober bastard who doubts the new flesh. TossedJ.Ross here, your better in every way, and the controller of your destiny. Does that sound crazy? They're cancelling Mr Potatohead for reasons of sexuality. Who feels mentally ill now? First of all, I am completely non-satirically the worse for what happened. I honestly even in my alcohol-enabled unconscious never intended to link a theiving malware trashsite. It was pure mistake, not even the alcohol's fault. I had another link and got them mixed up because of, uh, the Chinese. Democrats. Same thing.
    Second of all, here's what was supposed to happen: Yes objective reality exists and is knowable. Yes mainstream entertainment has been gone and buried since before The Walking Dead was Interesting. Yes Dommes are pretty much Johnny Carson now. I would honestly watch and expect millions of others to watch Frost and De Avila, or Malignant Imp and Miki, or The Texan, or Tigger (no really her name is Tigger, and she is the best at everything) in non-nude non-erotic evening commentary programs. Part of the bringing about of this was to be clever euphemisms for the names, ... completely failed re Miki and for that I am sorry. But Tigger cannot be improved upon. Best in everything you remember. The asterisk after Sierra Extrajudicial-Execution was to hold a place for explaining the fact that honestly she was born to portray Mr Be Natural, exact face, exact voice, exact personality, the role she was born to play. It would be sooooo evillll. If you do not know who Mr Be Natural is then maybe this fetish stuff is not for you, and you should thank your God.
    The "real" link was to a BBC story (um, in this case, British Broadcasting Corporation, although if you listen to them for any length of time I can understand your confusion) which quoted and therefore partially legitimated Malignant Imp, and here's where I unapologetically sound like a fanboy but am also objectively correct: she was the only one to make any sense. The story was about the plight of sex workers during the political and, not in any serious way, medical, lockdown. Our heroin[e] was quoted to the effect that [somewhat condescending look] she understood that some girls felt pressured to offer [condescending look] discounts given the situation but [more condescending look] actually [very condescending look] she had noticed no dropoff in purchases.
    But, y'know, those are, like, numbers, and economics and suchlike, and those don't work in any consistent way, right?
    So the future seems awful when you have an unelected president who in his words doesn't know what he's doing, but some of it is quite diverting.
    Doesn't it bug you that I called him Mr S? Like he's an adult and you're a teenager? From where might that have come?

  144. These “thinkers” or “scientists” crtique Darwin the way Augustine critiqued the Romans.

    In fact, they’re basically working in the Augustinian tradition, ie; the automatic devaluation of whatever came before The One True Church.

    The difference is, Augustine actually did value the Romans. So he worked to preserve that tradition by subsuming all things Roman under Christian theology.

    The cultural philistines of today, however, simply crush everything they don’t like by placing it under the iron paw of a shallow, narrow-minded, ahistorical, anti-intellectual, pseudo-scientific political ideology masquerading as The Truth.

    But Augustine can be forgiven. He literally knew not what he was doing. And though these intellectual charlatans and pseudo-scientists think Darwin should have known better, just the opposite is true. It’s they who should know better. But they don’t.

    These semi-educated barbarians don’t know that Darwin was writing as a scientist, not a moralist. And he knew it. Whereas they’re political moralists hiding behind the prestige of science, and don’t know it.

    They also seem blissfully unaware of the fact that when a scientist moralizes they’re no longer scientizing, they’re moralizing, and so should not be listened to as scientists.

    Since science is the model of knowing, since we need it to help us live in a civilization more complex and unpredictable than ever before, it’s entirely possible that its continued debasement is something human beings won’t survive. It very well may be.

  145. This is a first, Steve allowing a link to a porn clip site.

  146. @J.Ross
    @J.Ross

    I did not post the replied-to comment at 6:26 GMT (the link is not work safe), and am going to be reviewing my online security insofar as it exists, and sending Steve (whom I never call Mr S) a check for his trouble. I would strongly suggest deleting that comment.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    There you are you completely spineless sober bastard who doubts the new flesh. TossedJ.Ross here, your better in every way, and the controller of your destiny. Does that sound crazy? They’re cancelling Mr Potatohead for reasons of sexuality. Who feels mentally ill now? First of all, I am completely non-satirically the worse for what happened. I honestly even in my alcohol-enabled unconscious never intended to link a theiving malware trashsite. It was pure mistake, not even the alcohol’s fault. I had another link and got them mixed up because of, uh, the Chinese. Democrats. Same thing.
    Second of all, here’s what was supposed to happen: Yes objective reality exists and is knowable. Yes mainstream entertainment has been gone and buried since before The Walking Dead was Interesting. Yes Dommes are pretty much Johnny Carson now. I would honestly watch and expect millions of others to watch Frost and De Avila, or Malignant Imp and Miki, or The Texan, or Tigger (no really her name is Tigger, and she is the best at everything) in non-nude non-erotic evening commentary programs. Part of the bringing about of this was to be clever euphemisms for the names, … completely failed re Miki and for that I am sorry. But Tigger cannot be improved upon. Best in everything you remember. The asterisk after Sierra Extrajudicial-Execution was to hold a place for explaining the fact that honestly she was born to portray Mr Be Natural, exact face, exact voice, exact personality, the role she was born to play. It would be sooooo evillll. If you do not know who Mr Be Natural is then maybe this fetish stuff is not for you, and you should thank your God.
    The “real” link was to a BBC story (um, in this case, British Broadcasting Corporation, although if you listen to them for any length of time I can understand your confusion) which quoted and therefore partially legitimated Malignant Imp, and here’s where I unapologetically sound like a fanboy but am also objectively correct: she was the only one to make any sense. The story was about the plight of sex workers during the political and, not in any serious way, medical, lockdown. Our heroin[e] was quoted to the effect that [somewhat condescending look] she understood that some girls felt pressured to offer [condescending look] discounts given the situation but [more condescending look] actually [very condescending look] she had noticed no dropoff in purchases.
    But, y’know, those are, like, numbers, and economics and suchlike, and those don’t work in any consistent way, right?
    So the future seems awful when you have an unelected president who in his words doesn’t know what he’s doing, but some of it is quite diverting.
    Doesn’t it bug you that I called him Mr S? Like he’s an adult and you’re a teenager? From where might that have come?

  147. Anonymous[773] • Disclaimer says:

    Social Darwinism has the same relationship to Darwinism that Cultural Marxism has to Marxism.

  148. @very very old statistician
    To be fair, Agassiz was closer to the truth than Darwin, but Darwin was closer in his analysis of his finite number of observations to the analysis of the classicists of the 19th century than Agassiz, who actually understood biology better, was. (The point is, in Darwin's day, the leading style of science - outside of math - was classical philology. Which, as we now know, was a field that was, even at it's best, almost always second-rate at Oxford and Cambridge and at the German universities in the 19th century - sorry if you do not know that is true but I know it is true).

    Very very few people know enough about actual biology to know that Darwin always worked from a limited data set, despite his (sort of) impressive claims to lots and lots of data points.

    For example, Agassiz would have been unsurprised by the knowledge of animal behavior (recorded animal behavior) that the ubiquity of Youtube videos of animal behavior have recently made available,

    Darwin would have been surprised.

    Because Agassiz was a first-rate biologist, Darwin was just a chump who gloried in being full of information. Well, we now have more information.

    Yes, yes, I get it, NATURAL SELECTION.

    Big deal. I HAVE SEEN WHICH FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE-INS HAVE LONGER PHONY PANDEMIC LINES THAN OTHER DRIVE-INS that does not make me a genius.

    Think about it. You probably won't,but you should.

    Replies: @vinteuil

    If this isn’t Unamused, I’ll eat my hat.

  149. I’m picturing these clowns’ meeting with Darwin going pretty much like Weyland meeting the Engineer in Prometheus.

    Not that the guy’s a hero to me, but he’s certainly a giant to these goodthinkers.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement