Thilo Sarrazin and the Question of Population Genetics

Thilo Sarrazin, a German Central Banker, said not that long ago that "all Jews share the same gene".

This is interesting semantic territory because, of course, if you want to get technical there are innumerable gene variants shared by all Jews.

It just is that these gene variants are probably also found in all Humans.

Now with the Ashkenazi Jews, they might be inbred enough that there's a gene where it somehow managed to reach a rate of 100% in Ashkenazis, while not reaching 100% in non-Ashkenazis.

But it would be a situation where the Ashkenazis had a rate of 100%, while other Caucasoids had it at 90% or thereabouts.

(Note that even a 10% difference between Ashkenazis and another Caucasoid group on a particular gene variant would be unusual.  For example, even looking at the non-isolated European population most dissimilar to Ashkenazis, Russians, the average gene variant was found to have a 1.37% difference in the rate found in Russians as compared to the rate found in Ashkenazis.)

The genetic distance between Ashkenazis and other Caucasoids, especially Caucasoids descended from one or the other of the Ashkenazis' parent populations, is small enough that any process which put a gene variant at a 100% rate in Ashkenazis would also have put it at a very high rate in other Caucasoids.

What makes Ashkenazis distinct from other Caucasoid populations is the tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of gene variants which are found a little bit more in Ashkenazis, and a little bit less in other Caucasoids.

It has not yet been determined if all full-blooded Ashkenazis are always more related, in terms of the number of identical base pairs, to the average full-blooded Ashkenazi than to the average member of non-Ashkenazi groups.

But it seems probable that this is the case.

The thing is that Ashkenazis have a large Middle Eastern component to their genetics which pulls them further away from Europeans than you'd think based on how long they've been in Europe.

At the same time, they have a large European component to their genetics which pulls them away from Middle Eastern groups.

Anyway, I suppose part of why some took offense at Sarrazin's comment is because it made Jews seem more genetically distinct from others than they actually are.

Even if a gene exists which is fixed in Jews, while not being fixed on the species level, this gene would certainly be found in millions of non-Jews, and possibly billions of non-Jews.

It's large scale combinations of genes found more in Jews than non-Jews which make the Jews genetically distinct from non-Jewish populations.

Read more...

How to Avoid Divorce

In 1988 a survey was done of American White women, as part of the national survey of family growth.

It asked them if they were they were married, when they were married, if they were virgins when they were married, and whether the marriage ended in divorce.

The American White women who were married from 1965-1969 had a 50% chance of divorce if they weren't virgins when married, but only a 30% chance of divorce if they were virgins when married.

That's a 67% elevated risk of divorce for the non-virgin White women.

The American White women who were married from 1970-1974 had a 46% chance of divorce if they weren't virgins when married, but only a 30% chance of divorce if they were virgins when married.

That's a 53% elevated risk of divorce for the non-virgin White women.

The American White women who were married from 1975-1979 had a 34% chance of divorce if they weren't virgins when married, but only a 21% chance of divorce if they were virgins when married.

That's a 62% elevated risk of divorce for the non-virgin White women.

And finally, the American White women who were married from 1980-1983 had a 24% chance of divorce if they weren't virgins when married, but only a 14% chance of divorce if they were virgins when married.

That's a 71.4% elevated risk of divorce for the non-virgin White women!

This is a remarkably strong and consistent effect. 

The women who are virgins when married were FAR less likely to have had their marriages end in divorce.

Note: The divorce rate of later marriage cohorts tended to be lower due to more recent marriages having less time to end in divorce.

H/T: The Social Pathologist

Read more...

Out Of The Cradle Endlessly Rocking

Someone on Jewamongyou's Blog says:

The fact that Muslims run the majority of failed states outside of Africa isn’t a mystery.

This statement makes very little sense.

According to the IMF, the average European Country had an average per capita GDP of $27,634 in 2009, as compared to the average West Asian Muslim Country's average per capita GDP of $20,950.

That really isn't that large a difference.

Even though there’s more to being a “failed state” than having a low per capita GDP, this still makes me think West Asian Muslim Countries, far from being second only to African Countries in dysfunction, are actually ahead of the average Country outside sub-Saharan-Africa.

This is confirmed by the fact that the average West Asian Muslim Country has a per capita GDP that's 28% higher than other Countries outside sub-Saharan-Africa, and 94% higher than the per capita GDP of non-European Countries outside sub-Saharan Africa.

Read more...

But They Made The Weather And Then They Stand In The Rain And Say...

Neocon rag The Weekly Standard is whining that Britain and France don't spend enough money on their respective militaries.

What they don't seem to get is that it's Neocons like The Weekly Standardites who helped make war look stupid and wasteful with their pointless invasions of different Countries in the Middle East.

What they don't seem to get is that the Neocon supported scam called NATO was the thing which robbed Western Europe of the will to defend itself, or to pay for its own defense, in the first place.

Inadequately Resourced UK Military Faces Further Cuts

European governments have long forgotten that their primary task is the defense of those they govern. The two most prominent European powers, France and Great Britain, spend only 2.3 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively, of their GDP on military spending – amounting to less than what Djibouti and Namibia each spend on their militaries, in proportion to their GDP. The economic crisis has provided perfect political cover for those who have long favored slashing European defense spending even further to start getting their way – and they’re proposing greater cuts, anywhere between 25 percent to 40 percent of the military budget.

The degradation of the military is not a recent phenomenon. The UK has done defense on the cheap for years. Former prime minister Gordon Brown decided in 2007 that defense minister was not even a full-time job, asking a cabinet loyalist to do both that role and be secretary of state for Scotland. The current deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, believes that Britain should get rid of Trident, its nuclear deterrent. Last month he claimed that “It's going to be difficult for someone who is going to receive less housing benefit… to understand why we should spend huge, huge amounts of money on replacing Trident.” To put this in context: the Department for Work and Pensions receives over £150bn a year and the National Health Service nearly £94.5bn. The total cost of replacing Trident – which will last between 25 and 35 years – is £20bn. Yet the Treasury is breaking with tradition by refusing to fund it, meaning that the Ministry of Defense will have to – an outlay that will account for over 50 percent of its total budget.

As a result, it will be virtually impossible for the UK to offer any meaningful military assistance to the U.S. in the future. The overstretched and under-equipped Ministry of Defense can barely function as it is. The major shortage of helicopters in Afghanistan is now well established, with a parliamentary committee reporting last year that the lack of helicopters was having “adverse consequences” for Britain. Up to two-thirds of the Apache attack helicopter fleet has been described by the Ministry of Defense as “unfit for purpose.” Last July, a plan to severely diminish the threat of Taliban improvised explosives devices (IEDs) – responsible for more NATO troop deaths than any other tactic – was scrapped due to insufficient troop numbers and helicopters. A month later, British soldiers were forced to protect the remains of a senior officer killed by a roadside bomb for three days before a helicopter was available to collect his body.

Read more...

Once you eliminate the impossible

Lawrence Auster writes:
Meanwhile, Bill O’Reilly, about whom I have rarely said anything very positive, did an excellent job in the “talking points” segment of his show tonight summarizing the O’Donnell situation. First he laid out O’Donnell’s astonishingly poor resumé—her total lack of any kind of career, accomplishments, or income; her mortgage foreclosure, etc. But then he switched perspective and showed the ideological differences between O’Donnell and her Democratic opponent, an all-out leftist named Christopher Coon, who has called himself a Marxist. Suddenly, O’Donnell’s lack of life accomplishments didn’t matter very much. Given the choice between these two, whom do you want in the U.S. Senate? Obviously O’Donnell. Yet the odious spinner Karl Rove and the full-of-it sage Charles Krauthammer (who again did his sneaky Krauthammer thing, talking like a conservative even as he surrenders to Obamacare and tells us to surrender to it) seemed to be positively striving to make O’Donnell lose. She’s already won the nomination. The Republican voters chose her over Mike Castle. So what’s the point of making such a big deal about her credentials now—unless Rove and Krauthammer want her to be defeated by the Democrat?

Statsaholic Replies:
That is the point.  Rove and Krauthammer want O'Donnell to be defeated.  Smart of you to figure it out, Auster, considering that to my knowledge nobody else has noticed this.

The reason I'm pointing this out is that so often people refuse to see obvious things like this.  So often they fail to look at the context of Human Behavior, which the only proper praxis for the determination of motive, or at least the central part thereof.

Read more...

Solidarity

Christine O'Donnell won the Delaware Senate Republican Primary over noted hack Mike Castle.

Castle's response:

A Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) campaign source confirmed to The Hill late Tuesday that the longtime congressman will not be endorsing Christine O'Donnell.

The Tea Party-backed O'Donnell defeated Castle for Delaware's Republican Senate nomination.

As to whether the national party would back O'Donnell, a Castle campaign source said the campaign has no knowledge of their thinking but said "they should save their money."

Update: Inteprid Journalist and former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum has determined Christine O'Donnell advocated a "Chaste Lifestyle":

http://www.frumforum.com/odonnell-advocated-for-chaste-lifestyle

Read more...

The New Republic's Schizophrenia

Steve Sailer had a posting on Sunday quoting an article in The New Republic. 

So: Cordoba House in New York and a Predator war in Pakistan—graciousness here and viciousness there—this should be our position.

I honestly thought it had to be irony of some kind, at least for a few moments I reacted to it like it was.

But of course then I checked the context and it turns out it was serious.

For some reason this quotation reminds me of an interlude from the song "A Boozehound Named Barney", from The Simpsons episode "Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala(Annoyed Grunt)cious":

Sherry Bobbins:
In front of a Tavern, flat on his face
A booze-hound named Barney is pleading his case...

Barney:
Buy me a beer...two bucks a glass...
C'mon help me i'm freezing my ass...
Buy me brandy...a snifter of wine
Who am i kidding, i'll drink turpentine...

Moe (wielding rifle):
Move it! Ya drunk...or I'll blast your rear-end

Barney:
I found two bucks

Moe:
Then come in my friend..

Read more...

Tory Prime Minister of England Attacked From Left by Tory Mayor of London

Boris Johnson turns on party over immigration and demands cap is scrapped
By Gerri Peev, 9th September 2010

Boris Johnson has warned that plans to limit the number of migrants to Britain will damage the economy.

In remarks that put him at odds with his Conservative colleagues, the London Mayor called for a ‘major rethink of government policy’.

His broadside will come as a blow to David Cameron’s authority and is a sign that Mr Johnson has not limited his political ambitions to the capital’s City Hall.

At odds: Boris Johnson's negative stance on the Conservative's migration policy is blow to David Cameron's authority

His response to the government’s consultation on imposing a cap on immigration was leaked Thursday night.

Mr Johnson, who was also lobbying on behalf of the City of London, which seeks to lure top talent from around the world to its boardrooms, said, ‘A major rethink of Government policy is required’ as the cap would ‘have a significant negative and disproportionate impact on London’.

It will ‘put the economic recovery at risk by creating skills gaps and placing London at a competitive disadvantage in the global competition for talent and inward investment’, he said.

The coalition government wants to limit the numbers of workers from outside the EU as Britain’s own people are increasingly shut out of the tight jobs market. Net migration to the UK soared by 20 per cent last year to 196,000, despite the recession.

[How'd that happen?]

While the government is powerless to block migrants from the EU, it wants to whittle down the number of workers from outside Europe to the tens of thousands.

Resolute: Immigration minister Damian Green is determined that British businessess should end their reliance on migrant workers

But Mr Johnson argued that foreigners made a ‘substantial contribution to [the] UK economy’. Businesses were ‘unanimous in their opposition and hostile to the proposal’, he added.

‘They warn that the limit will damage small, medium and large businesses, prevent inward investment, talent and trade opportunities coming to London, and thereby materially damage London's competitiveness,’ he said.

The temporary cap imposed earlier this year was ‘already causing businesses significant recruitment problems’.

Immigration Minister Damian Green said: ‘Businesses are going to have to reduce their reliance on migrant workers as this has done nothing to help the millions of unemployed.

‘The Government will also introduce measures to support British people.

‘Alongside limits will be action to get Britain back to work and provide business with the skills they need from the resident workforce - reducing the need for migrants at the same time as we reduce their number.’

He went on: 'This Government believes that Britain can benefit from migration but not uncontrolled migration.

‘I recognise the importance of attracting the brightest and the best to ensure strong economic growth, but unlimited migration places unacceptable pressure on public services.’

This is not the first time that Mr Johnson has been at odds with Mr Cameron. He warned against the bonus tax imposed on bankers by the last government but supported by the Tories.

And he has also supported an amnesty on illegal immigrants – which has also been backed by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.

Read more...

Imitation

Some Preacher in Florida says he's going to burn a Koran.

Some guy with a popular Blog responds by saying this Preacher should say that burning the Koran is just wild and crazy performance art.

In other words, if it's okay for the US Government to fund "art" which consists of desecrating symbols Catholics and/or Protestants consider sacred, that somehow justifies desecrating something Muslims consider sacred. 

This is the Neoconservative cultural position in a nutshell: White Gentiles must become to Muslims what Jews are to White Gentiles.

If Jews fund films and artwork that blasphemes this or that religion popular with White Gentiles, White Gentiles should turn around and do the same thing to Muslims.

If Jews cut White Gentiles off from traditional gender roles by popularizing Feminism, then White Gentiles should turn around and inflict Feminism on the Muslim.

An interesting side effect of this is it forces the White Gentile to come out foursquare in favor of what Liberals did to his society.

If Feminism's so great that we need to die trying to bring it to Afghanistan, surely there's no reason to complain about its triumph in the West.

If desecrating holy books is so awesome that Preachers have to get in on it, surely there's no reason to complain about the massive media campaign to tear down religion, tradition, and sexual restraint.

After all, the only problem with that campaign is the hypocrisy.

Yeah, the only problem's the hypocrisy that they go after Catholics and Protestants so much while leaving the more exotic Sunni and Shia alone.

It was fine to arrest Dale McAlpine for quoting a passage of the Bible the Liberals don't approve of.

The problem is the hypocricy of not also arresting Muslims who quote passages of the Koran the Liberals don't approve of.

If only Liberals were consistent nihilists.

Update: I just noticed that almost all the Neocons who've written anything about this issue are against the Preacher burning a Koran. 

As of this writing, however, they remain firmly in favor of inflicting Feminism and other assorted impostures on the Islamic World.

Read more...

U.S. Troops In Iraq Excited To Finally Return To Afghanistan

Members of the U.S. Armed Forces were reportedly overcome with feelings of joy, nostalgia, and optimism this week after learning they would soon be withdrawn from Iraq and allowed to finally return home to Afghanistan.

"I never thought this day would come," said Cpl. Douglas Robinson, who hasn't seen the barren hills and smoking craters of his beloved Kabul in nearly six years. "Being away from those you left behind, for this long, it definitely starts to take a toll on you."

Added Robinson, "I can't believe I'm going home again."

In 2003, thousands of American soldiers were unexpectedly uprooted from Afghanistan and sent off to fight in a long and bloody war overseas. After serving multiple tours of duty in Iraq, the vast majority of these troops said they couldn't wait to get back and have their lives return to normal.

"It's going to be great to be surrounded by all those familiar faces again," said Pfc. Shawn Brunner, staring wistfully at an old and faded photograph of the bleak wasteland. "The tribal sheiks, the frightened villagers, all that wonderful rubble near the Id Gah Mosque. When I'm finally back on Afghan soil, I'll probably kiss the ground."

Like Brunner, marines stationed at Camp al Qaim in Iraq said they longed for the comforts of home, whether it's stopping off at a local eatery for a hot meal of sabzi challow, or spending Sunday afternoon cheering on their favorite buzkashi team.

According to military officials, the announcement of the long awaited homecoming has greatly improved morale, with U.S. soldiers looking forward to returning to the one place where they truly felt like they belonged.

"Hopefully we'll stay put for a while," said Cpl. Michael White, adding that he couldn't wait to hear the familiar strains of neighbors speaking Dari in the streets. "With any luck we'll be in Afghanistan for another 10 years."

While most remained enthusiastic about the trip home, a small percentage of military personnel expressed concerns that Afghanistan had drastically changed since they were called off to war. Others worried that it would now be awkward to interact with local warlords.

"I don't want people to treat me weird just because I've been away for so long," Lt. Gerald Karshner said. "I'm sure there will be a period of adjustment. You know, just getting reacquainted with the sounds of slightly less mortar fire, or that special tear gas smell that only Afghanistan has. Still, it'll be great to sleep in my old metal bed again."

The journey back will be bittersweet for some. Pvt. Michael Tagle, 24, said he could still remember a more innocent time in his life, when he would drive around all day in a tank with friends, several of whom, sadly, are no longer around.

"We had our entire lives ahead of us," said Tagle, who "pretty much grew up" in Kandahar. "Anything was possible. Going to college. Maybe starting a family someday. Even making the world a better place."

Added Tagle, "It's funny the things you picture for yourself when you're young."

Amid all the fanfare, there was some unpleasant news. Troops in the 11th Marine Regiment were ordered early Tuesday morning to ship off to the United States, a distant foreign land, filled with bizarre customs, strange beliefs, and millions of people they do not know or understand.

Read more...

Time

Read more...

Old People and the Military are Eating Us Alive!

A staggering 44% of the 2009 Federal Budget went to programs exclusively for people over the age of 65 (Social Security and Medicare).

This is in spite of the fact that only 13% of the US population is 65 or older!

Then another 24% went to the Military.

That adds up to 68% of the money we pay to the Feds either going to old people or the military.

Are we getting our money's worth?

It sure seems to me that so many of the old people in this society are spending their time living it up in creepy childless apartment complexes, not passing on their wisdom and experience to the young at all.

And don't get me started about the military.

I suspect what this all comes down to is that the Elderly are much more likely to vote than the Young, and Jews are much more likely to cut fat donation checks to politicians than Gentiles.

He who pays the piper...

Read more...

Hitting the Nail on the Head

"What naive conservatives like Beck and Palin and their followers don’t understand is that all our national symbols have been taken over by liberalism. Therefore, as long as conservatives fail to recognize and criticize this fact, their support for various national symbols, such as the military, is support for liberalism."
-Lawrence Auster

Read more...