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.
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.
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. :rolleyes:
Dibble, I bought that fucking book just for that stupid thread, and then the thread was promptly closed. :smack: 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.
…*after *already giving your uninformed opinion on page 1 (and then *continuing *to defend it for post after post, still not having read the book). My point being - it’s laughable you think anyone familiar with your posting would buy that you’re one for taking the high road and “passing things by”.
I read the first chapter before saying anything. That should be a sufficiently large sample to weigh in on an author’s writing ability. Or do you consider my (much more positive) impression of Andy’s writing chops to have zero validity as well? :dubious:
ETA: I don’t know what the “high road” has to do with it.
ETA2: I just realized that I said Andy is a better SF writer than a multiple Hugo award winner. That boy is going to get such a swelled head! :smack:
“Man, The Fellowship Of The Rings is phenomenally dull. The first scene is nothing but dull and confusing worldbuilding that makes basically no sense. I turned it off, what dreay dross.”
(I’ve never heard of Quillette, and have clicked no links.) The strident debates about “race” remind us that, even for intellectuals science is often subservient to political agenda. Is there a word (“ethnic group” ?) that can allow discussion to proceed without having scientific discussion pre-empted?
Oh? Exhume some skeletons from Pittsburgh, France, Senegal and Zambia. Is it really your assertion that forensic anthropologists would find it easier to distinguish the Pittsburghites than the Africans?
I think the evidence suggests that a particular epoch of exo-African migration is responsible for most of the ex-African populations today. To dismiss “more than 90%” because it is less than 100% is not a path to understanding prehistoric migrations. Unless understanding prehistoric migrations is opposed to your agenda.
The “science” of white supremacists (and their allies) is subservient to their political agenda, since they’ve never cared about actual science, and still don’t. Actual science demolishes most of the assertions of the white supremacists. This has been demonstrated again and again on this very board.
I would imagine that skilled forensic scientists would be able to use trace elements and similar phenomena to easily determine the origin (i.e. where the person lived their lives) of the skeletons. This, obviously, says absolutely nothing about genetics. My point was that sub-Saharan Africa has far, far more genetic diversity than the rest of humanity, and any given population outside of sub-Saharan Africa (such as the popoulation of Pittsburgh), or a sub-population inside of SSA, necessarily has less genetic diversity than the entirety of SSA. Which should be pretty obvious, when one thinks about it, but it’s an easy way to dismantle some of the dumbest claims of the white supremacists/“race realists”/etc.
I’ll dismiss it when it’s used to support claims of white supremacism, since the facts very clearly do not support these claims. There have been some major migrations, and many other migrations that were also significant, but from and into Africa. Those with an agenda like to ignore some of these facts.
Interesting, and if true, this does not dispute anything I’ve said.
If you are familiar with these posters’ histories, iiandyiii’s argument is that it’s easier (slightly easier, perhaps?) to find distinguishing genetic characteristics from say 100 skeletons taken from across the whole of the continent of Africa than 100 skeletons taken from across the whole of Pittsburgh.
Our resident idiot SlackerInc, on the other hand, has long been on the “everybody on the entire African subcontinent can be grouped together racially and genetically” bandwagon.
So, forget Zambia. We’ve got a poster (actually, several) that would argue that Zulus, Bantus, and Yoruba are all more genetically similar to each other (based almost exclusive on skin tone) than random people plucked from Pittsburgh.
Andy Ngo, editor at Quillette, decides, in honor of pride month, to list LGBT hate crime hoaxes.
Now, if this sounds familiar to you, you may be familiar with the numerous articles on Breitbart that do the same thing - highlight a minuscule number of hate crime hoaxes (compared to the number of actual hate crimes), leave out any context that might make the number meaningful, and pretend it means… Well, anything at all. The goal is to get people to reject the existence of hate crimes; to have a gut reaction of “probably another fake wannabe victim”. He damn near says as much:
“They can’t stand exposure of hate crime hoaxes because it makes it harder to politically exploit violence against LGBT people. The 26 killed trans people in 2018 were not all killed for being trans. This is important. I will go through each one-by-one.”
The rest of his feed is full of homophobic and transphobic rhetoric, presumably also “for pride”. Any talk of actual hate crimes, or acknowledgement of the risk posed by bigotry and bigoted rhetoric? Ha ha, as if - this is Breitbart for people who think they’re smart, not an actual news source.
WTF: are you lying, or just stupid? I said the exact opposite JUST UPTHREAD (Andy even acknowledged it!), and it’s far from the first time. Jesus.
If the question is how the overall story fits together, whether things were tied together well at the end, etc., that’s fair. But to spot bad or shaky writing doesn’t require reading a whole book. It doesn’t even require reading a whole chapter, for that matter. Are you aware of how long most authors toil over their first paragraph and especially their first sentence?
Funny you should frame it that way. I have ranked and rated nearly 1500 films, but there are many others I started and bailed out of after, yup, five minutes. (I always give any movie that length of time before pulling the rip cord.) Like authors, filmmakers work hard to make their opening shot and scene really special. If it comes across as so weak that I can summon no interest in continuing past the five minute mark, that’s a very bad sign, regardless of what unseen cinematic wonderment lies beyond that point (or, almost certainly, does not lie there).
:dubious: Do you really, or was this some kind of dry joke? (No, I have thus far only read the free sample of Andy’s book, just as I initially did with NKJ.)
Well thank you for acknowledging* at least that you have not replied to a very pertinent example (with experts) of what you consider the best way to check for information, a podcast. It was just a demonstration of how how you cherrypick the information you get and ignore even a report from experts in podcast form.
