Blog powered by Typepad

« "I hate the talent!" | Main | Sorry for the late start . . . »

Friday, 04 October 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

There are lots of minds greater than Norman Lebrecht's. First off, his argument is a case of special pleading, or cherry-picking facts. Looking at the timeline of important inventions and discoveries shows they range across the planet, including in the 19th and 20th centuries:

As far as biology and social science are concerned, race is a social construct. Two given Europeans can have more genetically in common with a Chinese person than with each other, so the basic premise is just wrong. There are some common points in ancestry, meaning that variations of some genes can be traced to specific locations, but they don't correspond to what people think of as race.

Bob, ask yourself this: how many Jews have lived in the modern era and how many non-Jews?

Then ask yourself how many seriously important inventions and discoveries and scientific theories have occurred in, say, the last 200 years?

Then ask yourself how many emanated from Jews and how many from non-Jews?

I obviously missed out on the genius gene that seems to have inhabited many of my coreligionists.

Is it worth mentioning the Jewish academics who devised the Frankfurt School of Thought? Look at how those 'thoughts' have affected societies all over the world.

What Penseivat said!

Do you think the British have had less influence?

Bob. The Lewontin fallacy? Really?

Give any geneticist a swab from a Chinaman, a Finn, and a Pygmy, and he'll tell you which is which. 100% of the time.

And everyone else can do it too, without the swab. As you know.

Sometimes I have to think you're just trolling.

As for the Jews: let's say, just to be charitable, that they have been overcounted by a factor of two in this list of great intellectual achievements. Such a presence would be what you'd expect, ceteris paribus, if Jews were a quarter of the world population.

They are not. In 1900 they were about two-thirds of one percent of the world population. So this would mean, even using the whittled-down list, that they "punched above their weight" during this era by a factor of 37 or so.

That is worth noticing and remarking on, I think. One might even say that it wants explaining. (Perhaps all things are not equal.)

(I'm on vacation abroad, with limited computer access, so I hope Mr. Duff et al. will forgive me if I fail to make timely responses to likely replies.)

Disraeli Gears.

Of interest, perhaps: Steve Sailer's race FAQ.

The comments to this entry are closed.