Always fascinating topics here and always just within my ability to understand, though written by almost anyone else they wouldn't be.
I think the last paragraph was meant as two cheers for John Hawks, though he didn't quite hold out for the whole three. Still, sounds like he was a damn sight braver than most of his peers, who folded without a fight.
I value Frost's detectable editing and framing to make high Tribe 4 and low Tribe 5 readers understand what he is writing about and positing (or sharing).
When someone mentions the 99.9% thing I (mis)quote the bit from Steve Sailor’s book where he stayes that we are 67% genetically identical to phosphorescent mould, or something.
Well all that really matters in life is mogging moral character Reilgion all this crap it doesn't matter people respect looks and height so the next generation my blood line has to ascend cause I got cooked with my genes
The thing about biological reality that astonishes me is that the particles are so small and there are so many of them. Thus if I'm not mistaken even a difference of one tenth of one percent in a genome can effect trillions of molecules in billions of cells. Or maybe even more than that.
Even more if that difference affects genes that regulate growth and development:
"Controlling the differential expression of many thousands of genes is the most fundamental task of a developing organism. It requires an enormous computational device that has the capacity to process in parallel a vast number of regulatory inputs in the various cells of the embryo and come out with regulatory outputs that are tissue specific." https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biophys.35.040405.102002
Rhetorically, "We aren't 99.9% genetically the same, we're 99.9% *nucleotidally* the same." Repeat until this is seen as trivially pedantic, like "correlation != causation."
Always fascinating topics here and always just within my ability to understand, though written by almost anyone else they wouldn't be.
I think the last paragraph was meant as two cheers for John Hawks, though he didn't quite hold out for the whole three. Still, sounds like he was a damn sight braver than most of his peers, who folded without a fight.
A lot of people threw in the towel during the Woke revolution. Perhaps I shouldn’t be so hard on John Hawks.
I value Frost's detectable editing and framing to make high Tribe 4 and low Tribe 5 readers understand what he is writing about and positing (or sharing).
I don't know what Tribe 4 or Tribe 5 are. If you miss two weeks of internet through illness, when you return you find the language has overtaken you.
Is this what you're referring to? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Tribe_seasons
Of course; what else might I have been referring to 🤭
When someone mentions the 99.9% thing I (mis)quote the bit from Steve Sailor’s book where he stayes that we are 67% genetically identical to phosphorescent mould, or something.
Which book is that? "Noticing"?
Yes.
I don't care about all this the bigger question is how do you make more mogger kids
The resolution of one question is often contingent on the resolution of others.
Well all that really matters in life is mogging moral character Reilgion all this crap it doesn't matter people respect looks and height so the next generation my blood line has to ascend cause I got cooked with my genes
The thing about biological reality that astonishes me is that the particles are so small and there are so many of them. Thus if I'm not mistaken even a difference of one tenth of one percent in a genome can effect trillions of molecules in billions of cells. Or maybe even more than that.
Even more if that difference affects genes that regulate growth and development:
"Controlling the differential expression of many thousands of genes is the most fundamental task of a developing organism. It requires an enormous computational device that has the capacity to process in parallel a vast number of regulatory inputs in the various cells of the embryo and come out with regulatory outputs that are tissue specific." https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biophys.35.040405.102002
Thanks. It really is mind boggling.
Thanks for an excellent and illustrative article.
In defense of Clinton, in this instance, she is ignorant, not devious
More harm is done through ignorance than through malice.
"More harm is done through ignorance than through malice."
Agreed. But stupidity is more dangerous than ignorance—ignorance can be corrected.
This is why we shouldn't have mercy on people who "have good intentions".
Rhetorically, "We aren't 99.9% genetically the same, we're 99.9% *nucleotidally* the same." Repeat until this is seen as trivially pedantic, like "correlation != causation."
Does the Internet Archive have Hawks' deleted post?
Yes. Go to: https://web.archive.org/web/20210624221131/http:/johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/race/differences/clinton_2007_proportion_differences_speech.html
Thanks!