Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-17-2019, 02:53 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,656

Quillette: the thinking racist's magazine


So out in ATMB I had some rather choice words to say about Quillette, and some people quite vigorously disagreed with me:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
TBH, anyone who thinks Quillette is “The smart racist’s Breitbart news” simply isn’t capable of deciding whether or not anyone is a “Nazi or a troll”.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Indeed, BPC is doing a marvelous job of illustrating my point.
I'm a little surprised that this is news. Quillette is incredibly racist. They might occasionally publish decent material (don't ask me to link any, I can name more decent reporting from Fox News off the top of my head), but their most high-profile work is the stuff that goes viral for entirely the wrong reasons.

Let's start with the most recent case. This isn't about racism per se, but it does help give us a look at the kind of ideology and standards Quillette is working with.

https://twitter.com/clairlemon/statu...95268337012736

That's Quillette's founding editor attacking a journalist for... asking her if she fact-checked a study she ran an article on. A study published by "ProgDad", a notorious right-wing troll. A study whose actual methodology was pretty obviously fucking garbage, and which for some reason only the far-right fell for. And uh...
But for conservative media, the endorsement of peers within its narrow confines is all the expertise necessary for publication. Quillette writer Andy Ngo, who called attention to Lenihan’s work on Twitter and whose work Lenihan cites in his article, insisted that the legitimacy of Lenihan’s findings was self-evident from Lenihan’s Twitter posts. Human Events publisher Will Chamberlain told CJR that it considered Quillette a “reputable outlet” and would not independently fact-check work appearing on its site when commenting on it “in broad terms.” CJR did not receive responses to emailed requests for comment from PJ Media’s Tyler O’Neil, RT’s Margarita Simonyan, or Breitbart’s Allum Bokhari. It seems unlikely that anyone reading these publications will encounter the sort of media criticism that dogs the steps of reporters for mainstream news outlets.”
Hmmmmmm.

Also, when called on exactly this, Claire's response was... let's just say "impolite". Because, as we all know, when you're an editor, telling a journalist who is criticizing you for taking a right-wing troll at their word to, quote, "Kiss my ass" is totally routine.

But okay, that's just showing that the senior editorial staff is really fucking bad at their jobs and wear ideological blinds the size of trash-bin lids - the same you could say for basically any right-wing media source at this point. What about the racism?

Well, I linked to this in the other thread, but apparently it went unnoticed. Here's Andy Ngo, editor at Quillette, defending craniology, because Quillette ran an article defending... "race science". Fucking really:
Angela Saini’s new book, Superior, is a cautionary tale about the historical legacy, and putative return, of what she calls “race science.” As far as we can determine, there are four main theses running through the book:
  1. ‘Race’ is not a meaningful biological category
  2. Genes can only contribute to population differences on certain “superficial” traits
  3. Studying whether genes might contribute to population differences on non-superficial traits is tantamount to “scientific racism”
  4. Almost everyone interested in whether genes might contribute to population differences on these other traits is a “scientific racist”

To be blunt, we disagree with all four of Saini’s main theses, as we shall explain in this article.
Yikes.
Furthermore, these differences reflect their divergent geographical origins. In fact, researchers can classify human variation by continent quite accurately using only data from the human skull.
Super fucking yikes! That's the paragraph that Andy Ngo was defending. Here's an actual scientist pointing out some of the many issues in that article. And, just for comparison, here's how an actual news outlet covered the book in question.

This is not the first time Quillette has dabbled in "race science". Nor should it surprise anyone, because the founding editor, Claire Lehmann, is a notorious fucking racist (and anti-feminist, and transphobe, and all-around competitor for "worst person in Australia", but this mostly about the racism). She's been quoted as saying "nationalism is the antidote to racism", which, given the contents of her publication, seems... totally wrong.

The idea that Quillette is somehow not "alt-right" (read: nazi), despite being founded by the alt-right and parroting alt-right talking points seems a bit silly to me. So let's run through some of Quillette's other greatest hits.

https://quillette.com/2019/02/12/it-...than-liberals/ - in which Quillette touts a "study" claiming that it found "a list of every prominent individual or political party known to have been banned from Twitter since its founding", which is a list of 22 people, of which they claim 21 are Trump supporters. The actual list includes David Duke, the American Nazi Party, Gavin McInnes (founder of the terrorist group "the Proud Boys"), and quite a few other prominent fucking nazis.

https://quillette.com/2016/06/23/on-...nce-of-racism/ - in which Quillette defends race as a biological category, something you'll note actual biologists won't do, but Nazis necesarily must believe.

https://quillette.com/2017/06/11/no-...ssing-iq-race/ - in which Quillette defends The Bell Curve (fucking really)

https://quillette.com/2017/06/02/get...gy-science-iq/ - in which Quillette continues to defend The Bell Curve, this time by Brian Boutwell, seen here on known neo-nazi Stefan Molyneux's podcast. Boy, weird that you can find connections like that on a website like this, right? Weird.

Shall I continue? I don't spend much time reading Quillette, for the same reason I don't spend much time reading Breitbart - nearly every time I interact with them, it's because they're being racist as fuck. But on the whole, Quillette was founded by a neo-nazi who used to work for Rebel Media, is run by her and a handful of other neo-nazis such as Toby Young, and just generally full of exactly the kind of racist shit you'd expect from those people. The idea that this is somehow "controversial" shows how little a great many people have looked into the publication, its history, and its founder. Quillette is the thinking man's Breitbart News - racism and all. But then, what do you expect from someone who worked for The Rebel Media, an outlet created and run by neo-nazis on what they call a "counter-jihad". They're not even very smart - they just manage to look smart for the dumb motherfuckers who decide to spend time there.

Oh hi, SlackerInc, didn't see you there.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 06-17-2019 at 02:56 AM.
  #2  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:11 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
I have not followed any of your links. But I did read your whole post, including the limited number of pull quotes you provided. Immediately after one such excerpt (the one with four numbered points), you wrote only “yikes”. Huh? The quote in question, while engaging in a controversial area of inquiry, contains nothing that I can see justifying such a response, with no elaboration. (Personally, I would go further and call it spot on.)

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-17-2019 at 04:14 AM.
  #3  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:15 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 300
This is a long and interesting post which deserves a detailed response. Unfortunately, I’ve only got my phone today so I’m going to have to leave that for another day. However, I must make one point...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet
Super fucking yikes! That's the paragraph that Andy Ngo was defending. Here's an actual scientist pointing out some of the many issues in that article. And, just for comparison, here's how an actual news outlet covered the book in question.
The ‘actual scientist’ BPC refers to is a lady called Dianna E Anderson. According to her website she has a BA in English Lit. and an MS (not to be confused with an MSc) in Women’s Studies. She isn’t a scientist. Furthermore, her “critique” totally misses the point of what the Quillette article was actually about.

Anyway, carry on.
  #4  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:26 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
(Personally, I would go further and call it spot on.)
Yikes.
__________________
"Until their much-needed total political extinction, you can expect the GOP to continue to take corporate money to systemically murder you and everyone you know."
- A. R. Moxon
  #5  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:38 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
(Personally, I would go further and call it spot on.)
What a shock from a self-described racist who has advocated the (evidence-free) hypothesis that black people are inherently genetically intellectually inferior! You really should include this as an addendum to every post you make that's even tangentially related to race. We wouldn't want people considering your posts without realizing that you're a bigot.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-17-2019 at 04:39 AM.
  #6  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:49 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
So no justification of the now multiple “yikes” is apparently forthcoming. OK then. I can see this will be a fruitful thread.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-17-2019 at 04:50 AM.
  #7  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:01 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
‘Race’ is not a meaningful biological category
Correct. "Pittsburgh" is a more meaningful biological category, in terms of genetic variation, than "black people" (i.e. people in Pittsburgh, or any randomly chosen city, have more genetic similarity, on average, than random "black people" do, on average).

Quote:
Genes can only contribute to population differences on certain “superficial” traits
I'm less than convinced this is actually a supposition in Saini's book -- let's see a cite that the book says this.

Quote:
Studying whether genes might contribute to population differences on non-superficial traits is tantamount to “scientific racism”
Not necessarily, but making bogus assertions about race that just so happen to match the white supremacists' claims is tantamount to "scientific racism".

Quote:
Almost everyone interested in whether genes might contribute to population differences on these other traits is a “scientific racist”
Everyone who makes claims about the supposed inherent genetic intellectual inferiority of black people is making a racist (and unsupported) claim. People actually interested in population genetics understand that categories like "black people" are not useful when it comes to biological classification, and don't fall into these dumb, obvious and (yes) racist traps.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-17-2019 at 05:03 AM.
  #8  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:19 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Correct. "Pittsburgh" is a more meaningful biological category, in terms of genetic variation, than "black people" (i.e. people in Pittsburgh, or any randomly chosen city, have more genetic similarity, on average, than random "black people" do, on average).

I believe it, because of the great genetic diversity among those with recent ancestors in sub-Saharan Africa. However, I am sure you could not say the same about Ashkenazi Jews, blue-eyed Caucasians, or people of predominantly East Asian ancestry.

More broadly: you guys need to much more finely calibrate your bigotry detectors. Coincidentally, some asshole just posted the following on a private FB group I belong to:

https://www.minds.com/RobTownsend122...3002708529152?

My response to another member who criticized the author as being a halfwit:

Quote:
The article is hateful garbage—and as you note, the simplistic writing style indicates, ironically, that the author possesses a mediocre intellect indeed.

And I say that as someone who vigorously defended Sam Harris and (to a more limited extent) Charles Murray in the wake of the recent dustup with Vox’s Ezra Klein. Townsend is nowhere in their league intellectually, and his naked, seething bigotry is exactly what Klein and his allies so unfairly strawmanned Harris into representing in their wildly distorted characterizations.

Learn to be a little more discerning about who the bad guys really are, and stop painting with such a broad fucking brush. It’s like you’ve never heard of Chicken Little, or the boy who cried “wolf”.

In the same thread, I also responded to someone who raised the issue of black children eating lead paint chips:

Quote:
There is also some indication that African Americans are more susceptible than others to the effects of lead. It’s very sad and should galvanize us all to support stricter governmental intervention to eliminate this public health hazard.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-17-2019 at 05:23 AM.
  #9  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:23 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I believe it, because of the great genetic diversity among those with recent ancestors in sub-Saharan Africa. However, I am sure you could not say the same about Ashkenazi Jews, blue-eyed Caucasians, or people of predominantly East Asian ancestry.
It's always about black people. These claims always get around to the supposed inferiority of black people, science and evidence be damned. Once they make these claims about black people, then it's clear that they're bigotry based, not science-based.

It's kind of amazing, really. You just admitted the incredible genetic diversity of sub-Saharan Africans (far, far more so than any other group), and yet you still haven't renounced your insistence that this most-diverse-of-all group is inherently genetically intellectually inferior. It doesn't make any sense, and still you cling to this racist bullshit. Which shows that it's not about science for you. I don't think it's about hatred, but whatever it's about, it's neither scientific nor positive in any way. Perhaps it's just about some misguided sense of ethnic pride -- you want to feel good about the group you're in, so somehow you believe other groups must be inferior. I don't know, but it's bullshit. Racist, bigoted, pseudoscientific bullshit.
  #10  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:36 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
You don’t seem to remember the long debate we had about this previously. I see categorization of all black people into a single “race” as extremely wrongheaded. It’s a simplistic, broad brush label based on a general geographic connection (most of a large continent) and the common factor that this very sunny region has spurred all its populations to develop a high concentration of protective epidermal melanin.

These statements, with which I expect you agree, are not applicable to groups like East Asians who descend from a small band of ultimately wildly successful pilgrims who left Africa millennia ago. They are the ones who have developed certain intellectual strengths that no doubt played a role in their being so successful in exponentially expanding the number of descendants they produced far beyond what any similar sized band who stayed in Africa can boast.
  #11  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:42 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
So no justification of the now multiple “yikes” is apparently forthcoming. OK then. I can see this will be a fruitful thread.
What, you want me to defend the idea that scientific racism is a crock of shit? No, sorry, I think I'd have a more fruitful conversation convincing a flat earther that planes are not secretly sky demons. What else, should I defend that Rebel Media is pretty much just nazis next?

Look, bozo, I don't expect you to get the "yikes", because you actually believe all this stupid shit. I left nothing more than a "yikes" there because I assume that most reasonable people can see the problem with the paragraph in question, not because I want to explain to a sealionining racist what exactly I find abhorrent about the claims made. Same thing with the Bell Curve - I'm not particularly interested in a nuanced discussion of why this long-discarded racist relic is bad science; I expect people to notice, "Oh, they're defending The Bell Curve" and reach the reasonable conclusion that they're a bunch of racist nitwits.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 06-17-2019 at 05:46 AM.
  #12  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:44 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,338
I don’t know anything about anyone or any publication mentioned in your post except for Stefan Molyneux. I hear he has moved considerably to the right over the last few years, but I know that he is not a neo-Nazi. This makes me believe you are, once again, full of shit.
  #13  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:55 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,115
My emphases:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Ashkenazi Jews, blue-eyed Caucasians, or people of predominantly East Asian ancestry.
♪♫♬ One of these things is not like the others ♪♫♬
♪♫♬ One of these things just doesn't belong ♪♫♬
  #14  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:57 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
These statements, with which I expect you agree, are not applicable to groups like East Asians who descend from a small band of ultimately wildly successful pilgrims who left Africa millennia ago.
It's cute that you think East Asians lack genetic diversity, or have only had one founding event, or ...whatever it is you're actually trying to say, here.
  #15  
Old 06-17-2019, 06:25 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
https://www.genetics.org/content/161/1/269
Quote:
Africans differ from one another slightly more than from Eurasians, and the genetic diversity in Eurasians is largely a subset of that in Africans, supporting the out of Africa model of human evolution.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
Quote:
Everyone living outside of Africa today has a small amount of Neanderthal in them, carried as a living relic of these ancient encounters. A team of scientists comparing the full genomes of the two species concluded that most Europeans and Asians have approximately 2percent Neanderthal DNA. Indigenous sub-Saharan Africans have none, or very little Neanderthal DNA because their ancestors did not migrate through Eurasia.
  #16  
Old 06-17-2019, 07:03 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
I left nothing more than a "yikes" there because I assume that most reasonable people can see the problem with the paragraph in question, not because I want to explain to a sealionining racist what exactly I find abhorrent about the claims made

I wonder if you have ever noticed that the original cartoon which spawned this “sealioning” concept actually begins with a couple of well dressed white people talking about how much they hate a certain dark-skinned population, that is an identifiable group solely because of a shared genetic inheritance they were born with and cannot change. A member of this population then overhears and, rather than lashing out in anger, politely inquires if they have any substantive reason for this antipathy toward his/her group. The upscale white people are annoyed and refuse to respond to this polite, dark-skinned questioner.

But in the age of Trump and his army of hateful, foulmouthed Twitter trolls, this other polite group is the one we should be denouncing? Really?

Furthermore, how have I done anything metaphorically equivalent to pestering you about this in your home, as depicted in the cartoon? You responded to me in a different thread with a link to this one!
  #17  
Old 06-17-2019, 07:21 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 300
Must admit I never got the whole ‘sea-lioning’ thing. In the context of today’s furious, relentless, psychotically abusive “callout culture” he seems like a nice change of pace. Maybe, instead of being polite, he should’ve just turned up with a megaphone and and a placard with ‘NO FREE SPEECH FOR VICTORIANS’ on it and screamed ‘FUCK YOU’ over and over til his voice box popped...
  #18  
Old 06-17-2019, 07:29 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
You don’t seem to remember the long debate we had about this previously. I see categorization of all black people into a single “race” as extremely wrongheaded. It’s a simplistic, broad brush label based on a general geographic connection (most of a large continent) and the common factor that this very sunny region has spurred all its populations to develop a high concentration of protective epidermal melanin.

These statements, with which I expect you agree, are not applicable to groups like East Asians who descend from a small band of ultimately wildly successful pilgrims who left Africa millennia ago. They are the ones who have developed certain intellectual strengths that no doubt played a role in their being so successful in exponentially expanding the number of descendants they produced far beyond what any similar sized band who stayed in Africa can boast.
At most, this is wild hypothesizing (and it appears to be based on an incorrect understanding of the facts, if you think there was a single "small band" who settled Asia, rather than a choppy and rather chaotic flow in and out of that and other regions between various populations, including to and from Africa).

But your previous extremely weird mention of "blue eyed Caucasians" demonstrates your true motivation -- your own feelings of superiority. The idea that blue eyes mark some sort of special ethnic group crosses beyond dumb pseudoscience into comical self-parody. No one but Aryan-supremacists actually believes that kind of crap.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-17-2019 at 07:29 AM.
  #19  
Old 06-17-2019, 07:50 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I wonder if you have ever noticed that the original cartoon which spawned this “sealioning” concept actually begins with a couple of well dressed white people talking about how much they hate a certain dark-skinned population, that is an identifiable group solely because of a shared genetic inheritance they were born with and cannot change.
I don't think I can add anything to this post to make it sound more stupid.

I also don't think this is the first time I've made that exact post in response to something you've said.
  #20  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:17 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Great thread, BPC. Really eye-opening.
  #21  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:21 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
The faux-intellectual bigots need a safe space. I don't know that much about Quillette, but perhaps it is the safe space for these silly but self-important people.
  #22  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:29 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
At most, this is wild hypothesizing (and it appears to be based on an incorrect understanding of the facts, if you think there was a single "small band" who settled Asia, rather than a choppy and rather chaotic flow in and out of that and other regions between various populations, including to and from Africa).

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016...re-50000-years
Quote:
In another paper, a team led by population geneticist David Reich of Harvard University comes to a similar conclusion after examining 300 genomes from 142 populations. “The take-home message is that modern human people today outside of Africa are descended from a single founding population almost completely,” Reich says.

There are dissenters who believe it happened more as you describe. But my narrative can hardly be dismissed out of hand as “an incorrect understanding of the facts”.

And as noted upthread, unlike sub-Saharan Africans, two percent of our DNA comes from literally an actual different species of primate.
  #23  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:40 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016...re-50000-years

There are dissenters who believe it happened more as you describe. But my narrative can hardly be dismissed out of hand as “an incorrect understanding of the facts”.
It wasn't a single group that left Africa -- Reich even says "The most recent migration “explains more than 90% of the ancestry of living people.”" in that link. Even if he's right (and I'm rather skeptical), that leaves tons of genes contributed by others. It also ignores the vast and heavily populated "border" areas -- Mediterranean populations; South and Western Asian populations; island populations; etc. None of those populations, with literally billions of people, can possibly be described as descending from a single small group alone.

At most, perhaps what he's saying is partially accurate in a very superficial and broad sense. But the details are much, much more complicated (and enigmatic).

Of course, even if he were 100% accurate, this provides absolutely no evidence in favor of your pseudo-scientific assertions about intelligence.

Quote:
And as noted upthread, unlike sub-Saharan Africans, two percent of our DNA comes from literally an actual different species of primate.
No surprise at the "us" and "them" implication in this sentence. You just can't help yourself, but it still comes out in your writing. I don't think you're actively hateful, but you just ooze with the certainty that you are part of some special, blessed group of humans, and bear condescension, and perhaps even unconscious contempt, for black people.

Until you actually take a good long look at yourself and actively try to cut out the bigotry like a tumor within you, you'll be a bigot for the rest of your life.
  #24  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:49 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
When one group (Eurasians) are partially descendants of a species previously thought extinct, and another group is not, how is it not objective, scientific reality, not me, creating the “us and them”? Of course, as Sam Harris has wryly pointed out, we are fortunate given the stereotyping of Neanderthals as primitive “cavemen” that scientists had not instead reported that it was the other way around, that only sub-Saharan Africans carried Neanderthal genes. Had it gone that way, the pressure from the “woke” crowd to suppress this information in academic and mainstream media contexts would have been extremely intense.

ETA: BTW, aboriginal peoples in Australia and other island nations are in the Neanderthal population along with Eurasians.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-17-2019 at 08:54 AM.
  #25  
Old 06-17-2019, 08:58 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
When one group (Eurasians) are partially descendants of a species previously thought extinct, and another group is not, how is it not objective, scientific reality, not me, creating the “us and them”? Of course, as Sam Harris has wryly pointed out, we are fortunate given the stereotyping of Neanderthals as primitive “cavemen” that scientists had not instead reported that it was the other way around, that only sub-Saharan Africans carried Neanderthal genes. Had it gone that way, the pressure from the “woke” crowd to suppress this information in academic and mainstream media contexts would have been extremely intense.
God you're a weirdo fantasist (as is Sam Harris, to some extent). This is just straw-man silliness. Harris has been criticized by progressives, and his ego renders him unable to reasonably consider criticism, so he lashes out at a massive group (those he considers "woke" or SJW or whatever), rationalizing away anything they ever say critical about him, no matter the evidence. Even to the point of making up absurd, awkward fantasies in order to make the fictional version of these people look silly!

Your "us and them" is a fiction you've chosen to believe due to your own weird supremacist biases. I'm more closely related on a blood/genetic level to millions of black people in America (and probably outside too) than to certain other far-flung non-black people... there's no possible legitimate biological classification that would place me in a group with those other far-flung non-black people, but not the black ones, even though I'm considered white by society, everyone who ever meets me, and my own upbringing. The same or similar is likely true for you and almost every other white or Asian person on the planet, in some variation. That ~2% of our ancestry might come from Neanderthals makes us no more "us and them" than that 3% might come from the Finnish, or the Tibetans, or Siberians. And even that Neanderthal ancestry is not so strict a delineator -- my West African spouse, born to two West African parents, in a West African country, has a little bit of Neanderthal ancestry, according to one of those mail-in genetic tests. Is she somehow not "pure" sub-Saharan African? Or are notions of "purity" complete and total bullshit? I take it you choose to believe in these harmful notions of purity, but it's a choice, and a bullshit, pseudo-scientific, and harmful-to-future-generations choice that you're making.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-17-2019 at 09:02 AM.
  #26  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:06 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016...re-50000-years



There are dissenters who believe it happened more as you describe. But my narrative can hardly be dismissed out of hand as “an incorrect understanding of the facts”.

And as noted upthread, unlike sub-Saharan Africans, two percent of our DNA comes from literally an actual different species of primate.
:blinks:

Not sure what you are going off here, but that in essence is the evidence that is used to argue that there is indeed just one human race. Of course, "scientific" racists do talk of gradual later genetic changes as if that was a meaningful way to make us as separate as the racists want it.
  #27  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:08 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Andy, your virtue signaling is duly noted. It’s what you are good at. (Actually, you do also seem to be good at writing science fiction, which—at least in the sample I read—surprised me by not reeking of performative wokeness.)

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-17-2019 at 09:09 AM.
  #28  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:11 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Andy, your virtue signaling is duly noted.
Fuck you, you racist piece of shit. Disagreeing with you, or with Sam Harris, is not "virtue signaling".

EDIT: Thank you for the kind words about my sci-fi writing.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-17-2019 at 09:11 AM.
  #29  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:13 AM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,111
Also, if disagreeing with racist pieces of shits is virtue signalling, than light me up commissioner gordon, I'm the virtue signal.

Quillette is racist trash, duh.
  #30  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:23 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Fuck you, you racist piece of shit. Disagreeing with you, or with Sam Harris, is not "virtue signaling".

That’s not what I was referring to.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
EDIT: Thank you for the kind words about my sci-fi writing.

You are welcome—they were deserved. But are you sure you value the endorsement of a “racist piece of shit” like me?
  #31  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:31 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
That’s not what I was referring to.
It doesn't matter. It's a flippant, lazy, and meaningless response. The equivalent of an unaccompanied "check your privilege" from a lazy progressive, and signifiying nothing more than your own unwillingness to expend any actual effort in defending your positions. We're all guilty of laziness occasionally, but I'm gonna call it out when I see it. Especially when it's paired with your rancid supremacist garbage.

Quote:
You are welcome—they were deserved. But are you sure you value the endorsement of a “racist piece of shit” like me?
I am not at the point in my writing career in which I can pick and choose endorsements.
  #32  
Old 06-17-2019, 09:45 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Okay, those are both fair points, well argued. Mea culpa for the lazy “virtue signaling” dig.
  #33  
Old 06-17-2019, 10:13 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I have not followed any of your links.
Because...?
  #34  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:10 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,172
Going a bit meta, and because we are in the pit, I will have to point here that the publication in the OP, Quillette, was encountered by me and many others before, it was cited by a poster called Chen019 and (IIRC) he also contributed to that site.

He was the one that first started as a "scientific racist", he posted later as a nativist, did go into appearing as a fake environmentalist (applying the concept of the carbon footprint just on immigrants), and ended up as a holocaust denier. A neo Nazi indeed.

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=644631
(Interesting in that the OP in that thread also showed how unimpressive is the argument SlackerInc is pushing here.)

Yes kids, when you use a poisoned well for your inspiration it will usually end up poisoning you.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 06-17-2019 at 11:12 AM.
  #35  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:22 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
And as noted upthread, unlike sub-Saharan Africans, two percent of our DNA comes from literally an actual different species of primate.
Not this shit again..
  #36  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:27 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
https://www.genetics.org/content/161/1/269
Quote:
Africans differ from one another slightly more than from Eurasians
Learn to fucking read with comprehension, you pathetic excuse for a Master Race member.
  #37  
Old 06-17-2019, 01:59 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Am I the only confused why this finding is remarkable?
  #38  
Old 06-17-2019, 03:18 PM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,265
I'm not surprised by it per se, but I did not know the timelines of it until this thread. These sorts of threads are often illuminating in that way.
  #39  
Old 06-17-2019, 03:59 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Because...?

It’s a flurry of links with no pull quotes. I intended to look at some of it when I found time, but I don’t think any of us owe anyone that much reading to respond to a single post. The OP’s unwillingness to engage beyond “Yikes” does not exactly inspire me to go back and dig deeper.
  #40  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:07 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,656
Meanwhile, a rational person might read the headline "in defense of the bell curve" and consider that enough of a pull quote.

These are all debates we've had. I have little interest in rehashing them.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 06-17-2019 at 04:08 PM.
  #41  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:12 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,463
I’ve never understood why the whole “everyone has Neanderthal genes except sub-Saharan Africans” idea was ever persuasive to so many people. It presumes that backflow into Africa didn’t occur...and how is that really plausible? As long as there was a door that let people out of Africa, there was a door that let people back in. Even if blackflow migration didn’t go deep, migrants were mixing with nomadic peoples, so their genes could spread far and wide within the continent.

Bottom line is that populations have been mixing with one another for as long as we’ve been a species. We fuck each other wherever we go. It’s just what we do.
  #42  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:28 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
It’s a flurry of links with no pull quotes.
...perhaps you'd prefer a link to a 2 hour podcast?
  #43  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:33 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,256
Anyway, I guess Slacker has proven that Quillette isn't the thinking racist's magazine.
  #44  
Old 06-17-2019, 04:53 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 34,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
Bottom line is that populations have been mixing with one another for as long as we’ve been a species. We fuck each other wherever we go. It’s just what we do.
Y'know, this would make for one hell of a GEICO commercial. Too bad the result would never make it to air.
  #45  
Old 06-17-2019, 05:08 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...perhaps you'd prefer a link to a 2 hour podcast?

If it comes with an OP who engages more than superficially? Sure. Or if I didn’t want to listen, I would pass the thread on by, just as I do with threads about movies I have not seen.
  #46  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:00 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...perhaps you'd prefer a link to a 2 hour podcast?
By experience I already know that the Slacker willfully ignores podcasts from scientists that gore his ox.
  #47  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:22 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Oh, GIGO.
  #48  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:41 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Oh, GIGO.
Oh you think that is just enough to show an interest about how a podcast that is not transcribed can be transcribed?

Yeah, not impressive when you continue to demonstrate how you ignored what the scientists did say about Murray, Harris and even Reich.
  #49  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:57 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I would pass the thread on by, just as I do with threads about movies I have not seen.
But you're quite happy to post uninformed shit about books you haven't read...

Last edited by MrDibble; 06-17-2019 at 11:58 PM.
  #50  
Old 06-18-2019, 12:37 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
GIGO, I hope you have that last sentence stored somewhere for copy and paste purposes, because you have posted it (with minor variations) seemingly scores of times.

Dibble, I bought that fucking book just for that stupid thread, and then the thread was promptly closed. Now I am stuck with it. And AFAIK, unlike a physical, printed/bound book, I cannot even make a gift of it or donate it to the library.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017