|
|
|
Pretty picture of Europe Right here. From Nature:-
From Dienekes’ post:-
And, below the fold, the bulk of JWH’s post, with substantial quotes from the original paper:- On a worldwide scale, Europeans as a whole are genetically relatively homogeneous. However, looking more closely, important intra-European differences do exist, and these correlate quite well with geography. Indeed, quite accurate assessments of geographic origin can be obtained from genetic analyses alone.
Attempts were made for reasonably accurate sampling.
Quite narrow distinctions are possible. Resolution using genetics can be quite high. Commercial autosomal genetic testing companies will have quite a lot of explaining to do if they do not significantly increase the accurate/precise distinctions possible with their tests, and soon (acknowledging the differences inherent in clustering and admixture analyses).
A reason why individualized autosomal genetic testing is important. Chosen or imposed ethnoracial identities may not precisely match actual genetic content. If there is a question, direct analyses are required.
Again, the N/S split seems the most important. From the standpoint of “demographic history,” the degree of Neolithic input seems a likely explanation. But:-
This is consistent with my hypothesis that correlates decreased social investment with increased genetic heterogeneity. It also underscores once again the importance of individual testing.
This is remarkable. From the EGI standpoint, papers such as this correlate with Salter’s original conception of measuring genetic interests as a function of gene frequencies (using Fst). However, the also important admixture studies - as well as 23andme’s “ancestry painting” - correlates with genetic structure. Both types of analyses are required, and I would like to see papers include both clustering and admixture analyses in the same work. My thanks to JWH for permission to quote all the below-fold copy here from his Western Biopolitics piece. Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:31 | # Apart from confirmation that there are distinct races, there is the subject of specific inborn differences between certain races: http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2008/09/02/the-evolution-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence/ 3
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:59 | # What is a biological entity, except “an extremely extended family that inbreeds to some extent? “ 4
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:40 | # And your point is, Desmond? You toying with endorsing race-denial now? The Ukes have gotten you that mad? Hey they’ve gotten everyone mad, but let’s not go off the deep end, shall we? 5
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:26 | # Why don’t you answer the question, Master Frederick? What is a biological entity if not an “an extremely extended family that inbreeds to some extent?“ 6
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:39 | # I don’t answer it because I don’t get the point you’re making in asking it, Desmond. Desmond, don’t turn from constructive to destructive. Unwise move. On anyone’s part. Everyone’s mad, not just you. But at the rate you’re going, you risk helping to hand victory to a certain commenter, whose intentions are suspect, on a Silver platter (no hint intended). 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:41 | # What it sounds like you’re doing is flirting with race-denial. 9
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:53 | # There you have it: Desmond Jones is now denying race. Race is a game of semantics. Exactly the position of the Jewish academics. Here’s the reply: yes you can deny race, calling it a game of semantics, but if you do, you have to deny every other categorization in the universe, since they’re all the same “game of semantics.” The universe then becomes absolutely incoherent. Are you prepared to do that, Desmond? “Who says A must say B.” There are laws, Desmond, laws. Reality is not a free-for-all. 10
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:54 | # Desmond is so mad at the Ukes and Wops, he’s ready to say anything now. 11
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:59 | # “Chair” is as much a game of semantics as “race.” Are you going to deny the chair you’re sitting on, Desmond? 12
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:02 | # Bizarre. An entry is posted which ought to cement the validity of race in everyone’s mind, and in Desmond’s mind it uncements it. 13
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:02 | # Why do Pontikos and Scrooby not use the r word instead of the phony construct that is “biological entity”? What are they denying? 14
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:14 | # Oh, is THAT your problem??? Is THAT ALL??? As if I don’t use “the r-word” — are you JOKING, Desmond??? I can’t speak for Pontikos but whatever word he uses, there’s no doubt what he’s referring to where race is the issue. He’s even developed and copyrighted a few algorithms for classifying people as to their race based exclusively on face-and-skull caliper measurements, just like in the Victorian era. And they’re accurate, too. Desmond, you know very well PC takes its toll in blurring what ought to be perfect plainness of discourse whether political or scientific, so one must put up with euphemisms for race like “geographical clusters” and so on. People don’t want to say “race.” But you also know perfectly well that, provided everyone possesses the key to the PC glossary, everyone is on the same page. 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:20 | # At his home page, http://dienekes.blogspot.com/ , scroll down the right-hand margin to “CALCULATORS.” He’s got six of them there, that you can click on, including one that tells if someone’s Greek. 16
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:24 | # Desmond, in this whole north-south thing, don’t hand Silver the victory he craves. No one but the other side will benefit from that. 17
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:29 | # There’s more at play than PC “blurring”.
There’s another agenda here. 18
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:34 | # The others already have benefited. If you’re not a race, you can’t be a race-replacer. 19
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:38 | # Desmond, you’re nitpicking. Call Englishmen, Irishmen, and Poles races. I do. It gets me criticized by JWH and Rnl whom I highly respect. I have my preferences, they theirs. (You, by the way, Desmond, may be the reason Rnl, a smart guy, no longer posts here. He didn’t cotton onto the north-south stuff you love, is my impression. To be fair though, I don’t think he was an especially big fan of mine either, so maybe it was you and I both who chased him away.) Now for something more substantial I was just reading: the research results described in the following excerpt suggest it’s at least within the realm of the possible that Jews have actually evolved genetically over the past couple of thousand years to instinctively loathe Euros, explaining the astounding groupwide uniformity and centuries-long stability of their antagonistic, destructive behavior in various ways relevant to this whole question.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/35249/title/Evolutions_Ear If Jews have indeed evolved an actual genetic hatred of Euros, that would explain a lot, not least being the seeming intractableness of their antagonistic, destructive behavior toward them, behavior moreover which generation after generation manifests without discernable provocation, as if innate. Presumably the reason we haven’t evolved more of a genetic defense against their predations is we’re so much more numerous, they such tiny populations in comparison so easier for them to focus, speed, and disseminate amongst themselves their rapid genetic evolutionary changes. 20
Posted by silver on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:36 | #
That’s quite likely. I recall having the impression that I was a “Powellite” on immigration. Whatever I may have said then to give that impression (and I did say a lot), being a “Powellite” is ultimately as useless as being a Jacoby-ite (or a Jacobite, for that matter). For all his intelligence, it seems he just didn’t “get” race, or thought he did but then realized he didn’t. Prozium (as Scimitar) put it to me straight, if you recall, that if I was Serb, he didn’t consider me white “at all.” (Not that I was ever claiming I was, recall.) Rnl stepped in to claim that “millions” (not true) of Americans were Serbs and rather obviously took offense at the suggestion they weren’t white; he probably “got” race at that point, and promptly departed. And talking about Ukes, isn’t Joe Sobran, mainstay of white American conservatism, a Uke? Hasn’t he come out against white nationalism, or at least stated that he doesn’t consider himself one? “With friends like that…” comes to mind. I think what gets these ostensibly “white nationalist” white ethnics is the realization that there never really was any real assimilation into undivided white American ethnicity, that all the while they’d been fooling themselves, that the “real” America only ever tolerated them (and continues to), but that in a racial break-up they can’t be sure of their position. So, I ask, is it better to pretend and risk having supporters not only scurry for the hills when they realize it was all pretend but turn against you, or is it better to lay the cards out on the table first, and then build racial alliances? I argue for the latter. You may as well weed out those who claim to love “the white race” and then do everything in their power to destroy it when they learn they’re not really of it before getting under way. Finding accomodation with racial outsiders, including so-called white ethnics, is far less damaging than misleading them. Lastly, Scrooby, MR isn’t some sort of “command central.” You can shut Desmond up all you like, but there are millions more of him out in the real world who’ve never even heard of Stormfront, let alone MR, who’d raise eyebrows, at the least, at the idea that a lab report on genetic structure establishes that the funny looking fellow with the dinaric nose is their “white brother.” That’s not an argument to leave that fellow in the lurch, or even to exclude him at all; it’s a call to lay the cards—all the cards—on the table, and recruit him to your cause or alert him to his predicament on that basis. 21
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:10 | # I’m ignoring Silver: he’s a sick asshole. If he has something to say let him say it plainly, which he never does but drags us through his narcissistic agonies over and over relating to how wounded and disoriented he grew up as a result of being a dagoe in Australia or something. First of all, it’s total bullshit because for one thing Serbs aren’t dagoes (Moslem Bosnians either), and for a billion other reasons. Second of all, he’s devastated that Prozium/Scimitar didn’t consider him white:
Proze didn’t consider me white either. Does anyone see me acting like Silver? Does anyone see me fretting over it? I’m not responding to Silver’s crap in detail because it’s one hundred percent bullshit intended to harm what our side stands for. He can talk to himself, he can talk in thin air, he can whistle Dixie; he’s not talking to me: I’m ignoring the creep. There’s a Russian saying, “When a dog barks, a man doesn’t answer.” I’ll add, “still less does a man answer when a dog turd barks.”
I’m not trying to shut Desmond up. The only one I’m trying to shut up around here is you, Silver, you devious twisted dishonest piece of malevolence. How about shutting up? 22
Posted by silver on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:00 | # I don’t recall ever using the words “wounded” or “disorientated” or characterising my experiences as “agonising.” Far from it. I simply said that I was aware of racial differences from a very young age, not that I was troubled by them. By my time, “wog” was very much a term of endearment among southern euros, and to be it called it by anglo mostly highlighted what almost all of us regarded as anglo degeneracy. I can’t think of one of us who didn’t feel superior to the anglos we grew up around. Most of us were working class, so our points of reference were lower class anglos. There was little question but that we were superior: Anglos mothers didn’t like to cook, didn’t like to clean, drank and partied, ordered their husbands around, fed their children canned food and looked forward to kicking them out of home at 18. It was almost impossible to feel insulted by this crowd. Apologies for “dragging” you through my autobiography again, but you, by continually basing your attacks on my person, make it necessary.
You’re making this up. I didn’t consider myself white, despite, let’s see, who was it, rnl, 2R, svigor, patting me on the back, giving me (completely unrequested) assurances, when proze simply came along and, in effect, “confirmed” what I already considered obvious (and never, before or since, attempted to dispute). He may as well have told me I am not, definitely not, under any circumstances, Asian for the same blank er-yeah-I-know look it would have gotten.
Actually, yes. We’re both on the same side. You’re what again, German/Jew/Russian? Hell, I don’t even care what you are. You may as well be the “paki” for all it matters to me. You’re either making sense or you’re not. I don’t respond to you when you are (which is a lot of the time), only when you’re going off on some unhinged rant or spreading malicious nonsense about me. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t bother so much with any one poster, but at any given time the “Recent comments” bar here will be about fifty percent Fred Scrooby, so you’re something of a de facto spokesman. Finally, I don’t know how many times I’ve stated that whites attempting to secure survival rights for themselves is moral and proper and that it has my support (and has it no matter who is “officially” considered “white”) or how many more times I’ll have to state it—if everyone else’s comprehension is as poor as yours, probably quite a few more. There’s no essential point of difference between us on this. The main difference would be my views on other races, which, I think I can confidently say, tower above yours in sensitivity and common humanity, but this isn’t an essential point (unless it begins to impinge, which, with the way you carry on about “carne mysteriosum”, it does, but I’ll leave that aside). As for talking to thin air, oh brother, dude, you’re the one swinging punches at thin air like some drunkard the way you wade into every thread with breathless, bold-type “groundbreaking” news of some Jew with a pro-immigration/anti-racist point of view. Get a grip. 23
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:21 | # For comrades looking for reading material this post is also essential reading, in addition to this which I’ve already referenced somewhere above, and of course the present log entry. Store this stuff away for easy fingertip retrieval for whenever you need a reference or just for re-reads from time to time. New evidence is constantly coming out, of course, so your stock of reference material will grow steadily. 24
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:29 | # The Jewish academics are fighting a rearguard action against all this, but are still persisting with their Straussian-Jewish lies, as, disputing every single inch of the way, they’re being steadily rolled back by a little thing nobody can resist called truth. (Ever hear of it, Jewish academics?) They’ll lose in the end but they’ll never admit our side is right or that they’ve lost because their Jewish Straussian doubletalk philosophy takes the position they never have to admit being wrong, but need only invent more lies and transparent sophistries to cover themselves and try again to get what they want through dishonesty. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:35 | #
Where’s Gongstar/NuxGnomica’s participation? Where’s Troll Watch’s? Where’s the participation by all these guys who are good at shooting their mouths off to complain about my participation? They don’t comment, then dish out resentment when someone else does. 26
Posted by Jun on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12 | # Fred: “...virtually every educated Jew on the planet, for that matter, is a public race-denier and race-replacement advocate: I crunched the numbers and there are six worldwide who aren’t....” Who the heck are they? Can you give us a list? Thanks! 27
Posted by P. Chetwin on Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:22 | # Fred Scrooby is one reason I visit MR. I remember him from when he used to harrass poor Larry at VFR. 28
Posted by Fr. John on Sun, 07 Sep 2008 05:02 | # This is quite the discovery. BUt then, for those of us who knew it all along, it merely is ‘corroborative detail intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative’ as W.S. Gilbert says. But, think of it this way. If YHWH God has a ‘chosen people,’ and that ‘chosen people’ spread out to ‘bring into the fold’ those racially delimited as the “Romaioi” (Citizens of the Roman Empire, extant during Christ’s life) then we can honestly say with Belloc, “Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe.” For this clearly shows that the election to Grace is tied to the Election of Race, and that all those who are part of that race (i.e., Caucasoid Humanity) is that “Chosen People.” Which, of course, makes the Jews even more on the ‘outs’ than that which St. John says of them in the last book of the Bible, “Revelation”: “I know those who say they are jews, but are not- they are a Synagogue of Satan.” [Rev. 2:8,9, and 3:8,9] So, when Christ said he was ‘sent only to the LOST SHEEP of the house of Israel,’ it would appear from where Christendom was born and grew, that those that are ‘called by His name’ ARE those ‘lost sheep’ mentioned in both the OT and the NT. Which was the exact praxis of the first millennium of undivided Christendom…‘so glad to have my opinion backed by a competent authority…’ which then leads, understandably, to ‘...modified rapture.’ Quite- God IS an Englishman, or at least a Caucasian….. 29
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 07 Sep 2008 16:36 | # Actually, Fr. John, people have been pretty convinced that God was probably, sort of, an Englishman for quite a while. A few millenia in the equine case.
I might add, since we have discussed it on another thread, that the chap in the middle is obviously the god of chavs. 30
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:46 | # Important discussion by JWH in regard to the increasingly understood fact that inborn differences — inborn racial and species differences — aren’t limited to just the genes themselves (that is, aren’t limited to the differences in the nucleotide sequences of the genes of one race as compared to the same genes in another race) but depend on the “extra-gene” or “inter-gene” structure of how those genes come together on the chromosome. This extra-gene or inter-gene “genetic structure” adds to the fundamental differences that are due to differences in the simple nucleotide sequences of homologous genes, making for even greater genetic differences between, say, us and Negroes than heretofore recognized even by “race-realists” (in other words, by non-Jews — in these discussions, “race-realist” is code for “non-Jew”). http://westbiop.blogspot.com/2008/10/genetic-structure-initial.html Post a comment:
Next entry: The irrational hatred of the Jewish extended phenotype
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Keep up the good work, Mr. Scrooby!
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:29 | #
The importance of this paper can’t be overemphasized. I was going to paste the entire comment by Dienekes here, but it’s easy enough to click on the link provided and read it over there. (Dienekes Pontikos, by the way, is slowly growing less leftist with the passage of time. He’s still a man of the left, but noticeably less so than when his blog first started.) Everyone should read JWH’s and Dienekes’ commentaries on this paper and store all the references away for further easy access and review, as needed. And everyone should, once these materials have been read, digested, and stored away for fingertip reference as needed, ask himself how it is that individuals with academic backgrounds, such as Prof. See the Boring Disgrace (Prof. C. Loring Brace), “race-realist” GnXp.com’s star blogger David B (by the way, how can a “race-realist blog” have a race-denier as a star blogger???), Jewish race denier and race-replacement advocate Prof. Jared Diamond (virtually every educated Jew on the planet, for that matter, is a public race-denier and race-replacement advocate: I crunched the numbers and there are six worldwide who aren’t, or 0.00003%; Jewish academics and other educated Jews are the world ringleaders of the Jim-Jones-type race-denial cult, Judaeo-Holocaustian Race-Replacementianity; Jews like Alon Ziv are its high priests and bovine-brained goys like the Freepers and Lucianne.com’ers its Kool-Aid drinkers), and so forth: ask yourself how these sorts could dare to continue their lies in the aftermath of this paper’s publication and the previous publication of the tons of earlier papers that showed the same basic thing.
Then draw your conclusions.