Animation of human migration

[ApostateAbe]

A video by Business Insider, sourcing data from the Genographic Project of National Geographic. It is a brief geographic history of the human species, providing the context for understanding genetic diversity of human races. It is simplified but approximately accurate.

 

[exodiasrightleg]

Yeah, it's pretty interesting stuff, but it does not support your bullshit at all.

 

[ApostateAbe]

Yeah, it's pretty interesting stuff, but it does not support your bullshit at all.

That's OK. My intention is to promote knowledge, not just the knowledge difficult to accept.

 

[none]

maybe??
http://www.piercepioneer.com/study-reveals-new-origin-of-modern-human/41415
Study Reveals New Origin of Modern Human

It was not that long ago that historians and anthropologists began to agree that the origins of human populations—as we know them—likely began in Africa. However, while this has become common knowledge, the migratory path that our earliest ancestors too out of Africa and spreading to the rest of the world has been under debate.

Current theory suggests that this migratory path may have begun northward out of Egypt rather than southward through Ethiopia (and the Arabian peninsula), as many have believed.

Dr. Luca Pagani, of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute and the University of Cambridge, note that these two routes are the most geographically plausible. Using genomic analyses of six modern Northeast African populations (100 Egyptian and 5 Ethiopian—each represented by 25 separate people), they determined that there appears to be a higher genetic similarity between Egyptians and Eurasians than there are between Ethiopians and Eurasians.
...

 

[Perspicuo]

Yeah, it's pretty interesting stuff, but it does not support your bullshit at all.

That's OK. My intention is to promote knowledge, not just the knowledge difficult to accept.

Unacceptible does not mean hard to accept. It means it contains methodologically flawed and empiricially unsubsantiated claims that are scientifically rejected by serious researchers. That's not the same as "hard to accept". It's as hard to accept as flat Earth, meaning not at all--it's simply well-known bunk.

 

[PyramidHead]

If you wanted this to be a thread about "promoting knowledge" of the migratory patterns of early humans, you wouldn't have posted it in Pseudoscience. You obviously expected (hoped?) to spark a conversation about why black people are genetically dumber than white people, and felt like saving TomSawyer the effort of moving that conversation to this forum, where it belongs--and, tellingly, where a discussion of early human migration does not belong.

 

[fromderinside]

If you wanted this to be a thread about "promoting knowledge" of the migratory patterns of early humans, you wouldn't have posted it in Pseudoscience. You obviously expected (hoped?) to spark a conversation about why black people are genetically dumber than white people, and felt like saving TomSawyer the effort of moving that conversation to this forum, where it belongs--and, tellingly, where a discussion of early human migration does not belong.

Who was Johnny Carson's foretelling character? Naw, it wasn't PyramidHead.

 

[ApostateAbe]

If you wanted this to be a thread about "promoting knowledge" of the migratory patterns of early humans, you wouldn't have posted it in Pseudoscience. You obviously expected (hoped?) to spark a conversation about why black people are genetically dumber than white people, and felt like saving TomSawyer the effort of moving that conversation to this forum, where it belongs--and, tellingly, where a discussion of early human migration does not belong.

I was told by the admins to put everything remotely related to race or intelligence or evolutionary theory in the "Pseudoscience" forum.

 

[ApostateAbe]

Posted in the Private Feedback forum:

I received the following private message this morning:

ApostateAbe,

The Moderation Team has determined that the appropriate forum for your threads about race is Pseudoscience. All of your current threads will be moved there and any additional threads which you create in other forums will be considered spam and they will be deleted and you will receive an infraction as per the site's TOU. You are more than welcome to continue discussing the topic as much as you like, but only in the appropriate place.

If you have any questions about this decision, please start a thread in the Private Feedback forum.

TFT Moderation Team

I don't want to receive any infractions, so tell me which forums these topics should go into:

• Topics about the theory of evolution, non-human-race related
• Topics about the theory of evolution related to pre-modern hominid varieties, such as Neanderthals
• Topics about intelligence among non-hominid species
• Topics about intelligence among pre-modern hominid varieties
• Topics about genetic distances between populations
• Topics about human haplogroups
• Topics about race related to politics, without a scientific or pseudoscientific emphasis
• Topics about intelligence
• Topics about the heritability of intelligence
• Topics about the heritability of human behaviors broadly
• Topics about human races as a social construct with an egalitarian focus

I know this is a long list, and I don't want to waste your time, so maybe instead you can just give a clear definition of "pseudoscience." Thanks.

Pretty much just put it into Pseudoscience unless it's unrelated to those.

 

[ApostateAbe]

That's OK. My intention is to promote knowledge, not just the knowledge difficult to accept.

Unacceptible does not mean hard to accept. It means it contains methodologically flawed and empiricially unsubsantiated claims that are scientifically rejected by serious researchers. That's not the same as "hard to accept". It's as hard to accept as flat Earth, meaning not at all--it's simply well-known bunk.

I don't think we should miss this essential point: Jensenism would be absolutely hard to accept even if it most plainly had 100% of the evidence behind it. I know this, because most people make very strong decisions about the science before having the faintest knowledge of the facts. I don't claim that Jensenism most plainly has 100% of the evidence behind it--just the body of evidence mostly in its favor is all I claim. The evidence can be here or there, but there can be no reasonable denial one way or the other that the theory is hard to accept, at least in large part for non-scientific irrational reasons. It is an important distinction, because we really should not be using the perceived scientific unlikelihood of a scientific theory as justification for extreme zealous hatred of the theory. We should be more rational about it, one way or the other.

 

[Perspicuo]

Any worthwhile scientific theory that has been substantiated creates a shift in human thinking. And it's happened time and time again without serious long-term resistence.

But when it goes on and on without substantiation, that isn't "hard to accept", that's just obduracy. And crying about how everyone hates me because I'm pretty, is not going to make the grade.

 

[ApostateAbe]

Any worthwhile scientific theory that has been substantiated creates a shift in human thinking. And it's happened time and time again without serious long-term resistence.

But when it goes on and on without substantiation, that isn't "hard to accept", that's just obduracy. And crying about how everyone hates me because I'm pretty, is not going to make the grade.

About 40 years ago, Jensenism was a minority theory among intelligence researchers, plausibly anyway, but it was for sure the popular target of hate, associated with everything evil and wrong. Arthur Jensen and his allies at the time were the targets of every type of popular backlash, including violent threats, roudy demonstrations, and blistering editorials, as though it was discovered that they preach doctrines of the KKK in their classrooms. What happened afterward, then, was a little unexpected: Arthur Jensen's arguments quietly and gradually won over the majority of intelligence researchers. The academics who intended to collect evidence to oppose him (such as Sandra Scarr and Robert Sternberg) instead collected evidence that confirmed his theory. Such evidence includes transracial adoption studies, brain size correlations, skin color correlations among populations, racial admixture correlations, and the same hierarchy existing in almost every multiracial society, all on top of the established knowledge of strong genetic heritibility of IQ within groups and genetic racial variations of many other phenotypes. However, the shift among intelligence researchers happened quietly, they did not much affect academic opinions outside their field, and the public remained completely oblivious to this shift, believing that the experts believed that racial variations in anything politically important was no more than pseudoscience. Why did the public remain oblivious to the academic shift? Because popular ideology affects which ideas are popularly aired. The Huffington Post or Salon or Washington Post or MSNBC or NPR may each have a hundred articles about the Flynn Effect or about the claimed non-existence of race or about the claimed uselessness of IQ, but only a few very-carefully-worded articles that acknowledge that the race-IQ gaps even exist, or that IQ variations are mostly heritable, or that IQ correlates with brain size, or that IQ has an 80% relationship to academic success and a 50% relationship to income. These are all established facts, but, if they are scarcely told to the public for fear that they are racist or elitist, then what do you expect the outcome will be? God help a newspaper editor if he or she publishes a full defense of Jensen's theory of race and intelligence. Millions of members of the public who perceive established science to be fringe was the result. This means, if a scientific theory is hard to accept because of the politics, then it matters, because the politics has a very strong effect on the perception of the probability of a theory. If you have decided ahead of time, before ever looking at the complete body of the evidence, that only a neo-Nazi would believe this ridiculous pseodoscientific bullshit, then... the evidence absolutely will never matter regardless.

 

[Bomb#20]

If you wanted this to be a thread about "promoting knowledge" of the migratory patterns of early humans, you wouldn't have posted it in Pseudoscience. You obviously expected (hoped?) to spark a conversation about why black people are genetically dumber than white people, and felt like saving TomSawyer the effort of moving that conversation to this forum, where it belongs--and, tellingly, where a discussion of early human migration does not belong.

I was told by the admins to put everything remotely related to race or intelligence or evolutionary theory in the "Pseudoscience" forum.

Gee, I was assuming that after seeing all your threads moved here including ones for which there's no argument to be made that their content was pseudoscience, you were just bowing to the inevitable. Silly me.