Beautiful post, very profound to say the least. I liked how you tied in current events with the scientific facts. I’m gonna write a more cogent response later.

I’m interested in the research you cite saying there’s no correlation between IQ and attractiveness. A bit surprising, to be honest. Anything else regarding that?

On the “only” two sexes: how do you deal with XXY’s and very mannish-looking lesbians (so-called “bull dikes”)?

Ethics is always a tricky business. It’s never terribly pleasant saying negative things about people, even if they are true. I think there needs to be some balance, at least; if I’m willing to say negative things about people, I should at least endeavor to say some positive things about them. Clannishness, for example, has its good side (yes!) Many clannish people are warm and loving toward most people they encounter, having lived all their lives in a society where they are cocooned by the presence of near kin/being adapted to such an environment. Many non-clannish people are rather cold and distant by comparison. Many traits have trade-offs; violence and friendliness appear to be trade-offs. A friend of mine lives in South Africa and describes it as the friendliest country he’s ever lived in (and he’s lived in several). Australia, by contrast, was unfriendly and unpleasant.

As someone who tends toward pessimism, I try to remind myself of this; every society has its good points, at least from the POV of the people involved.

Personally, I’m hoping you make some more posts on the American nations, soon.

Looks like your kid is growing happy and healthy. 🙂

It’s childish to point to some 1% or 0.1% incidence exception to a rule and use it to somehow debunk the rule. This isn’t mathematics or physics.

Congratulations on your 200th post birthday

Given that lactose map, I wonder if Australia is now (or soon will be) the most English country in the world. Or English plus a founder effect. It will be interesting to see if this will show in the level of corruption. My guess is it will.

Jayman, at what population correspond the very low brainsize zone in east Africa on the brainsize chart ?

jayman will you post more often in the future ???

JayMan, thanks for the post. Have you explained somewhere why you believe that “Debates about the merits of allowing it [i.e., knowledge of heritable group differences] to be commonly known are ultimately about timing – debating the when, not if”? I.e., why do you believe that eventually heritable group differences will become a matter of common knowledge?

@JayMan:
Thanks for your response. The thing is, this stuff is already true, and there’s already a lot of evidence for it, but it’s also hardly sayable, at least in academia and in public (presumably also not in business, in sports, etc.). I agree that a fair number of people will discover this stuff, but I’m just skeptical about it becoming “commonly” known.

Again, thanks for this post — I’m going to explore the links and get up to speed on this in my free time.

Indeed the disconnect between what real live people see with their own eyes daily and what the Elite and the MSM tell them they see (or should see) is evidenced by the media’s and the Elites’ reaction to what Trump said about illegal immigrants from south of the border contrasted with what real people are saying (“Well, he said it like the bull in a China shop that he is, but he’s RIGHT”).

I live in California and was once a stupid liberal. Most of my friends still vote for Dems and consider themselves “open-minded” and liberal but hate the POTUS’ and the Elites’ support for open borders and in private say, “I don’t care if they get married, I just wish gays would shut up enough already… I’m sick of their whining and in-your-face bitching every day” –and this from two of them with lesbian nieces.

My point distilled: What we see conflicts with what TPTB say we see and the whole thing is building to a point at which that disconnect is going to explode. Just don’t know when.

Reblogged this on Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar and commented:
Great resource!

Came here via Disenchanted Scholar. Excellent work. Look forward to more.

JayMan,

First time commenting on your blog. This was a fascinating introduction (for me) into the world of HBD, reading into the rest of what you have provided here.

The damage done by immigration is ultimately a million times worse that what a few crazies do. The Roofs of the world are a statistical inevitability, there are always a few loony losers who attach to some ideology or another (this week the Confederacy, next week Jihad, the week after New Atheist terrorist, etc). Its tragic, buts its a rounding error that doesn’t matter in the big picture.

By contrast future generations are going to curse our anti-racism as a crime against humanity that screwed the human race at a fundamental level.

Ultimately only the racist high IQ societies (like Japan) will survive. The rest will turn into South America (or whatever the Muslim refugee equivalent is in Europe).

I have no doubt that general acceptance of HBD would lead to bad outcomes, its just that the long term outcomes of HBD denial are 1,000x worth and are un-repairable. In fact the tragedies people seek to avoid by denying HBD are likely to happen and be even worse in the future. You have more humane options when NAMs are a minority. When NAMs are a majority you have fewer good options.

“A Fastidious Connoisseur of Empiricism” is such a word sandwich and hardly arrogant enough. Get that changed to Magna est Veritas et Praevalebit or something similar.

The late Marxist historian Eugene Genovese was often accused of writing too favorably about the antebellum South:

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/148550

More broadly, Mr. Genovese was accused of playing down the truth that slavery, by definition, demonstrates the cruelest kind of racism. Mr. Genovese repeatedly felt compelled to assert that his books were not an apology for slavery. In subsequent books, Mr. Genovese praised intellectual life in the antebellum South, particularly its tradition of cooperative conservatism, which he saw as kinder than capitalism in the North. He cited statistics showing Southern whites, even those from disadvantaged families, were more apt to go to college than Northern whites. He argued Southerners preferred broader ownership on property and more constraints on the marketplace.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1995/oct/05/southern-comfort/

The easiest way to approach Eugene D. Genovese’s fascinating recent work on Southern conservatism is to compare the two lost causes that he has long admired. For in his view the slaveholders’ ideology, theology, and political theory, which culminated in the Southern Confederacy of 1861–1865, and the Marxist-Leninist ideology, which culminated in the Soviet Union and Maoist China, represented the only serious challenges in modern history to the domination of bourgeois values and finance capitalism. “The fall of the Confederacy,” Genovese points out, “drowned the hopes of southern conservatives for the construction of a viable noncapitalist social order, much as the disintegration of the Soviet Union—all pretenses and wishful thinking aside—has drowned the hopes of socialists.”

“Equally important, the effect of the shared environment appears to be zero for these traits. Children growing up in the same home (and sharing all the environmental influences such children encounter) do not resemble one another in any discernible way (especially when measured as adults, and when the effect of assortative mating in addressed). Adopted children aren’t any more similar to their adoptive families than random strangers. ”

You know that c2 means shared environment right? And that a lot of those in the table you show are greater than zero, and many are significantly so? And reproduction, social interaction, and social values are all quite high?? And these matter just a bit…