ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, March 25, 2019

Scientists don't understand statistics

Which is why it's good that hundreds of them are signing on to an effort to abandon the concept of "statistical significance":
Let’s be clear about what must stop: we should never conclude there is ‘no difference’ or ‘no association’ just because a P value is larger than a threshold such as 0.05 or, equivalently, because a confidence interval includes zero. Neither should we conclude that two studies conflict because one had a statistically significant result and the other did not. These errors waste research efforts and misinform policy decisions.

For example, consider a series of analyses of unintended effects of anti-inflammatory drugs. Because their results were statistically non-significant, one set of researchers concluded that exposure to the drugs was “not associated” with new-onset atrial fibrillation (the most common disturbance to heart rhythm) and that the results stood in contrast to those from an earlier study with a statistically significant outcome.

Now, let’s look at the actual data. The researchers describing their statistically non-significant results found a risk ratio of 1.2 (that is, a 20% greater risk in exposed patients relative to unexposed ones). They also found a 95% confidence interval that spanned everything from a trifling risk decrease of 3% to a considerable risk increase of 48% (P = 0.091; our calculation). The researchers from the earlier, statistically significant, study found the exact same risk ratio of 1.2. That study was simply more precise, with an interval spanning from 9% to 33% greater risk (P = 0.0003; our calculation).

It is ludicrous to conclude that the statistically non-significant results showed “no association”, when the interval estimate included serious risk increases; it is equally absurd to claim these results were in contrast with the earlier results showing an identical observed effect. Yet these common practices show how reliance on thresholds of statistical significance can mislead us.... The trouble is human and cognitive more than it is statistical: bucketing results into ‘statistically significant’ and ‘statistically non-significant’ makes people think that the items assigned in that way are categorically different. The same problems are likely to arise under any proposed statistical alternative that involves dichotomization, whether frequentist, Bayesian or otherwise.

Unfortunately, the false belief that crossing the threshold of statistical significance is enough to show that a result is ‘real’ has led scientists and journal editors to privilege such results, thereby distorting the literature.
It's important to remember that most scientists have no more training in statistics than any other college graduate. And even if they did sit through an extra class or two devoted to the subject, that doesn't mean they are any good at it.

Labels:

You failed parenting

I don't even know where to begin with this:
In her practice, Dr. Levine said, she regularly sees college freshmen who “have had to come home from Emory or Brown because they don’t have the minimal kinds of adult skills that one needs to be in college.”

One came home because there was a rat in the dorm room. Some didn’t like their roommates. Others said it was too much work, and they had never learned independent study skills. One didn’t like to eat food with sauce. Her whole life, her parents had helped her avoid sauce, calling friends before going to their houses for dinner. At college, she didn’t know how to cope with the cafeteria options — covered in sauce.
That's one benefit of having been raised in a family with a Marine Corps tradition. From childhood, one is informed that there is always and only one answer to every obstacle: improvise, adapt, and overcome!

Labels:

Sunday, March 24, 2019

No collusion, no obstruction

No wonder the media is weeping and gnashing their teeth over the Mueller report:
"[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." On the question of obstruction of justice, Barr writes that while Mueller's report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
Now that's over with, let's see the President get on with draining the Swamp and building the Wall.

Labels: ,

The midwit's pain

Nothing burns a gamma's soul like public humiliation:
Dr Jordan B Peterson@jordanbpeterson
I've never encountered a writer as self satisfied by his own intelligence as this one

Dr Jordan B Peterson@jordanbpeterson
With the clear exception of Vox Day.
Some readers have asked me why Peterson is mentioning Jordanetics now after ignoring it for several months. The reason is that he's had a very bad week and discovered that despite his success, he's still not accepted by the intellectual elite whose approval he craves, so he's lashing out at everything that is causing him emotional pain.

Gammas never forgive and never forget, which is why they're capable of erupting angrily over something that happened years ago, even when everyone else has forgotten it. In Peterson's mind, his rejection by Cambridge and the contempt with which he is treated in Jordanetics are essentially the same thing, it's a malicious refusal to grant him Special Smart Boy status.

Speaking of midwit:
Thank you Niall, for your support @nfergus I'm going ahead with a series of Exodus lectures, regardless, but I think they will be lesser because I will not have had the opportunity to consult with a diverse group of experts.
I think they will be "lesser" too, but more because Dr. Peterson's grasp of both the Bible and the English language are questionable.

Labels: ,

So that's it?

We'll see, but it sounds like a whole lot of nothing is all Mueller found:
Attorney General William Barr has scoured special counsel Robert Mueller’s confidential report on the Russia investigation with his advisers, deciding how much Congress and the American public will get to see about the two-year probe into President Donald Trump and Moscow’s efforts to elect him.

Barr was on pace to release his first summary of Mueller’s findings on Sunday, people familiar with the process said.

The attorney general’s decision on what to finally disclose seems almost certain to set off a fight with congressional Democrats, who want access to all of Mueller’s findings — and supporting evidence — on whether Trump’s 2016 campaign coordinated with Russia to sway the election and whether the president later sought to obstruct the investigation.

Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller and oversaw much of his work, analyzed the report on Saturday, laboring to condense it into a summary letter of main conclusions. Mueller delivered his full report to Barr on Friday.
I've been under the weather all weekend, hence the non-posting. Expect normal service to resume on Monday. On the plus side, however, AH:Q #1 is now illustrated and colored, so it will be out soon.

Labels:

A race, not a religion

This news should conclusively end the long-running shell game:
Judy Maltz reported in Haaretz that the Israeli Rabbinate, which controls conversion, marriage and divorce in Israel, is using DNA testing to verify a person’s Jewishness. Since a person who isn’t Jewish can’t marry a Jew in Israel, which has no civil marriage, the rabbinate is using the DNA test to deny people they consider non-Jews the civil right of marriage.
As if it wasn't already obvious when Ben Shapiro was bragging about being 100 percent racially pure.

Labels: ,

Friday, March 22, 2019

It needs to be said

Dr Jordan B Peterson@jordanbpeterson
Because it needs to be said, apparently here's what the Alt-Right, in its own words, thinks of my work (much as I hate to advertise the book).

The amusing thing is that anyone who reads Jordanetics is going to realize that Jordan Peterson isn't an "alt-right darling", in fact, he isn't of the Right at all, he's something much worse and considerably more disturbing than even his most vociferous left-wing critics are claiming.

I look forward to the inevitable one-star fake reviews from the buckos. Because that will TOTALLY stop people from reading it. LEAVE JORDY ALONE!

Labels:

Devil Mouse to cut up to 10,000 jobs

Disney appears to be a lot more likely to shut down Marvel Comics than anyone likely believes. They've already shut down Fox 2000, which produced more revenue from a single movie release than comic sales ever could:
Disney still hasn't disclosed an official number of jobs they plan to cut. Analysts estimate 4,000-10,000, though several employees say the number being floated among people in the know is closer to 3,000....

One employee on the TV side told THR how disheartened the television employees were at witnessing the carnage in film, but later the ax began to fall there, as well, with 20th Television president Greg Meidel let go.

Disney also laid off Fox Consumer Products boss Jim Fielding, and sources say that of about 50 U.S.-based staffers in that division, five have received pink slips. "I've never seen anything like this — from any company," says a Fox employee who witnessed Thursday's drama.

Disney has said all along that it intends, due to the merger, to save $2 billion annually by 2021, and such rhetoric usually means jobs will be lost. "This is what happens in mergers," explains Northlake Capital Management founder Steven Birenberg. "It's partially the point, as cost savings boost the financials."
It's possible that the cost savings will be limited to the Fox acquisition, but in light of the multi-year decline in Marvel revenues combined with the budget imperative, it wouldn't exactly be shocking to see them shut down the production and pursue a licensing strategy.

Labels: , ,

Rejecting AIPAC

The anti-BDS movement attacking American First Amendment rights appears to have gone seriously awry, as MoveOn has publicly thrown down a gauntlet in the face of AIPAC.
No Democratic presidential candidates committed to AIPAC conference as liberal group calls for boycott. With some Democrats advocating a re-evaluation of the U.S relationship with Israel, the progressive political advocacy group MoveOn is calling on 2020 candidates to boycott this year’s conference of prominent pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC.

It’s not clear yet which 2020 Democratic candidates — if any — were planning to attend this year. But in the past three presidential cycles, the eventual nominees for both parties spoke at the conference the year of the election.

Iram Ali, MoveOn’s campaign director, told NBC News that the boycott only applies to this year’s conference. That could leave the door open for candidates to attend next year, when the Democratic presidential primary will be in full swing. But she described alignment with AIPAC as anti-progressive.

“It’s important that the next Democratic nominee has progressive values, not only in their domestic policies, but also in their foreign policies,” Ali said. “You cannot be a progressive and support AIPAC because of the policies that they’ve supported.”
It's mildly amusing to see the shock being expressed by conventional conservatives. Apparently their civnattery prevented them from ever thinking through the obvious implications of the changing Democratic Party demographics. Of course, they're more inclined to piously denounce anti-semitism - DRRA - than they are to take advantage of the situation.

The Trumpslide 2020 just got that much bigger. It's not that Jews will vote for Republicans no matter what bones Trump throws Israel, but at least they'll probably be less enthusiastic about funding his opponents.

Labels: ,

Slander is a Judeo-Christian value

Ben Shapiro slanders me and Milo in his outrage over the fact that Jordanetics is still on sale at a bookstore in New Zealand while 12 Rules for Life is not.
There is no way that banning Jordan Peterson's book from sale in New Zealand is preventing shooting. This is, it's just utter craziness.

By the way, other books that continue to be on sale at Whitcoulls include Mein Kampf, which has to do with white supremacism, guys, and also, a book called, it's like, Jordantology, by Vox Day, an outspoken white supremacist, and Milo Yiannopoulos, an alt-right troll. That book is still on sale, apparently, at Whitcoulls. So, just, very, very solid stuff here, from the Left.
This is classic Judeo-Christian wormtonguery from the Littlest Chickenhawk. There is literally nothing even remotely objectionable in Jordanetics except for the language that some of the Jordan Peterson fans direct at me and the disturbing quotes from Jordan Peterson concerning his overheated dreams about his naked grandmother and his hot cousin. The book has literally nothing to do with white supremacy, mass shootings, or New Zealand, but as far as little (((Ben))) is concerned, Jordanetics is right up there with Mein Kampf.

Which, I suggest, testifies to it being a compellingly conclusive takedown of the intellectual fraud that is Jordan Peterson.

Notice how heavily these wormtongues rely upon their inversive rhetorical wizardry to deceive their audiences. Consider that here we have an example of a Neo-Palestinian supremacist who openly boasts about his racial purity calling a mixed-race American Indian who publicly rejects the concept of racial supremacy "an outspoken white supremacist".

Anyhow, if you don't understand why Ben and Jordy are crying about Jordanetics, you can acquire the audiobook+ at Arkhaven.

Labels: ,

Failing the 4GW test

The Macronistas are failing the 4GW test in France:
The French government is to deploy its military anti-terror force as reinforcement during Act 19 of Saturday Yellow Vest protests. The decision by President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday, came after violence marred last weekend's protests, spiking to levels not seen since December.

Many targets by the movement in Paris and other cities included known landmarks and stores or places seen as elitist, such as the Parisian restaurant Le Fouquet's on the Champs Elysées.... After the weekend, the French government sacked the top police official in Paris, 66-year-old Michel Delpuech, for failure to keep the protests in the capital from spiralling out of control.
It's only a matter of time before the French praetorians rebel and side with the nation against the globalist government.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, March 21, 2019

The Big Bear roars

Owen Benjamin responds to Ben Shapiro attempting to get people to talk about his latest attempt to twist the history of the West to serve his Neo-Palestinian interests:
This little shit called my buddy Vox Day a white supremacist today. Shapiro brags about his racial purity that allegedly leads to high IQs and justifies their dominance in power and wealth. While Vox is an American Indian who reads all day and writes video games has never once said white people are "superior." Ben Shapiro is barely 3 Rogans tall and schizophrenia runs deep in his family.

He should pump the brakes on his (((strong genes))). Apparently not recognizing Jews as racially superior makes you a white supremacist. But it doesn't though. That's a lie. Which is what Ben does. You gotta read some of the sick shit this guy has said on record. He's literally pro (((genocide))) and no the stupid three parenthesis thing is not as offensive as genocide you bunch of sheep morons. #owenbenjamin
I was wondering why Shapiro would suddenly resurrect that old libel to which the New Republic first resorted during the demolition of the Hugo Awards, and apparently the reason is that he's talking his book.

The very title of Shapiro's new book is a lie: The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great

Typical revisionist wizardry. One could make a better historical case for the Black Plague than for "reason and moral purpose". The West became great for three reasons: Christianity, the European Nations, and the Greco-Roman philosophical legacy. The Littlest Chickenhawk is on the side of those attempting to destroy Western civilization, which is why he is consciously echoing the Marxianism of his Trotskyite forebears.


UPDATE: I'll do a video review of The Right Side of History on Unauthorized for subscribers next week. It won't take long to read the book, as it's only nine chapters long and the style is far less meandering than Peterson's. But having read the introduction, it's obvious why Ben Shapiro was attacking me in connection with the book's release, as he uses the false and self-contradictory term "Judeo-Christian" no less than 70 times in the book, although it felt as if he used it 70 times in the introduction alone.

His basic thesis is that Western Civilization is the result of Jerusalem and Athens, which is about five-sixths false. Based on that initial glance, I have no reason to doubt that the book will be full of similar deceptions, falsehoods, and blatant historical revisions.

One amusing point. He actually mentions that his wife is a doctor in the third sentence of chapter one. Promo code: hilarious!

Labels: ,

Recognizing sovereignty

Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!
9:50 AM - 21 Mar 2019

I'd prefer the United States fully recognize its sovereignty over its own southern border myself. Does President Trump really believe any American gives a flying rat's ass about what is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel in light of the complete lack of their own security?

I suspect this is primarily about trying to keep Netanyahu in office. Even so, whatever happened to America First?

Labels: , ,

Start a list

One of Obama's top advisors recently committed suicide:
Alan Krueger, a groundbreaking Princeton University economist who served as a top adviser in two Democratic administrations and was an authority on the labor market, has died after taking his own life, his family said. 'It is with tremendous sadness we share that Professor Alan B. Krueger, beloved husband, father, son, brother, and Princeton professor of economics took his own life over the weekend,' a statement from his family reads. 
Why did he do that? We have been given a clue in this regard.

Start a list.
- Q

Meanwhile, photographer Rachel Chandler appears to be the next link in the grand weave to unravel.

Keep digging, Anons. RACHEL CHANDLER IS KEY.
- Q

Pizzagate is just conspiracy theory, right? James Gunn was just telling harmless jokes, right? It's all just art, right? Perhaps... but perhaps not. And whether you believe Q is legitimate or not, he/they are indubitably correct about one thing: these people are sick.

Labels:

Why the US will lose the next war

Either Kurt Schlichter has been perusing this blog or he's simply observing the same things I am:
Nations famously tend to always try to fight the last war, and what America is preparing to do today with the newly assertive China is no exception. The problem is our last war was against primitive religious fanatics in the Middle East and China is an emerging superpower with approaching-peer level conventional capabilities and an actual strategy for contesting the United States in all the potential battlespaces – land, sea, air, space and cyber. America is simply not ready for the Pacific war to come. We’re likely to lose.

In Desert Storm, Saddam Hussein was dumb enough to choose to face a U.S. military that was ready to fight its last war. That last war was the Cold War, where the Americans were prepared to fight a Soviet-equipped conscript army using Soviet tactics. And Saddam, genius that he was, decided to face America and its allies with a Soviet-equipped conscript army using Soviet tactics, except fractionally as effective as the Russians. It went poorly. I know – I was there at the VII Corps main command post as his entire army was annihilated in 100 hours.

Chances are that the Chinese will not choose to fight our strengths. In fact, those chances total approximately 100%.

It’s called “asymmetrical warfare” in English. What it’s called in Chinese I have no idea, but Sun Tzu wrote about it. Don’t fight the enemy’s strength; fight his weakness. Strike where he is not. Spread confusion about your intentions; force him to lash out. It’s all there in The Art of War; it’s just not clear anyone forming our current American military strategy has read it. Maybe they would if we labeled it “Third World” literature and said checking it out would check a diversity box for promotion.

We seem intent on fighting not the enemy we face but the enemy we want to face. This is a rookie mistake. And we’ve built our strategy around that error.
The point about the way we have switched to the German strategy in favoring quality over quantity is a very good point too. The roles have changed; China is now in the place of the USA in terms of manufacturing capability that the US was vis-a-vis Germany and Japan in WWII.

Labels: ,

Nationalists replace conservatives in Holland

As anticipated, nationalism is replacing failed conservatism all across the West:
Euroskeptic party, Forum for Democracy, is set to become one of the two largest groups in the Dutch Senate, stripping the ruling coalition of its majority after winning provincial elections on Wednesday. Forum voor Democratie (FvD) has scored a major victory and is set to win 12 seats in the upper house of parliament – as many as Prime Minister Mark Rutte's conservative VVD Party, Dutch broadcaster NOS reported after the majority of the votes were counted. The outcome also means the loss of its Senate majority for the ruling coalition, which comprises four center-right parties led by the VVD.

The 75-seat Senate will be elected on May 27 by 570 members of 12 provincial councils whose composition was decided on Wednesday. The FvD scored slightly more votes than the VVD after receiving a surge of last-minute support following a shooting in Utrecht this week by a Turkish-born man. The party's leader Thierry Baudet immediately pinned the incident on the government's “lax immigration policies.”

“If people want more deadly shootings like the one in Utrecht, then they have to vote for the VVD,” he said a day before the elections.
Conservatives conserve nothing. Not the marriage, not the ladies room, and not the nation. They are feckless, hapless, virtue-signalers defined chiefly for their ability to lose to the Left. Nationalists are taking power in Austria, Holland, Hungary, Italy, and Switzerland, and it is only a matter of time before they do so in France and Germany as well.

Ignore the gatekeepers. Reject them with the contempt that is their due. They are doing the work of the globalist Left in trying to prevent the rise of true nationalism in the place of their fake "civic nationalist" statism.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

How Gammas handle rejection

Jordan B. Peterson provides an excellent demonstration of how a gamma male handles being rejected. It's hilarious, because he clearly believed he was now beyond experiencing any more of that, having become Rich and Famous. This is a classic Gamma response we know as the Wall of Text.

Cambridge University Rescinds My Fellowship

From @CamDivinity, this morning (Wed, Mar 20, 2019): “Jordan Peterson requested a visiting fellowship at the Faculty of Divinity, and an initial offer has been rescinded after a further review.”

I visited Cambridge University in November of last year, during my 12 Rules for Life Book tour, one stop of which was the city of Cambridge, where I spoke publicly at the venerable Cambridge Corn Exchange. While there, I had lunch and dinner and various scheduled conversations with a good number of faculty members and other interested individuals who came in for the occasion, and we took the opportunity to speak with a welcome frankness about theological, philosophical and psychological matters. I also recorded twoYouTube videos/podcasts: one with the eminent philosopher Sir Roger Scruton, presented by The Cambridge Center for the Study of Platonism, and another with Dr. Stephen Blackwood, founding President of Ralston College, a university in Savannah, Georgia, preparing for launch.

I was also invited to address the student-run Cambridge Union, the oldest continuously running debating society in the world – a talk which was delivered to a packed house (a relatively rare occurrence) and which, despite being posted only four months ago, is now the second-most watched of their 200 total videos. I’m mentioning this for a very particular purpose: CUSU, the Cambridge University Student Union (not to be confused with the aforementioned Cambridge Union), pinned to their Twitter account the rescindment announcement three minutes before (!) the Faculty of Divinity did so, and in a spirit of apparent “relief.” The Guardian cited the following CUSU statement:

We are relieved to hear that Jordan Peterson’s request for a visiting fellowship to Cambridge’s faculty of divinity has been rescinded following further review. It is a political act to associate the University with an academic’s work through offers which legitimise figures such as Peterson. His work and views are not representative of the student body and as such we do not see his visit as a valuable contribution to the University, but one that works in opposition to the principles of the University.

It seems to me that the packed Cambridge Union auditorium, the intelligent questioning associated with the lecture, and the overwhelming number of views the subsequently posted video accrued, indicates that there a number of Cambridge students are very interested in what I have to say, and might well regard my visit “as a valuable contribution to the University.” I also have to say, as a university professor concerned with literacy, that the CUSU statement offered to The Guardian borders on the unintelligible, perhaps even crossing the line (as so much ideological-puppet-babble tends to): what in the world does it mean that “it is a political act to associate the University with an academic’s work through offers which legitimise figures such as Peterson”? And who could write or say something of that rhetorical nature without a deep sense of betraying their personal conscience?

In any case: In November, when I was in Cambridge, I began discussions with one of the faculty members (whom I had met briefly before, in London) about the possibility of entering into a collaboration with the Cambridge Divinity Faculty. I enjoyed the conversations I had at Cambridge immensely. I learned a lot about Biblical matters that had remained unknown to me in a very short time. This was of particular relevance to me, but also perhaps of more broad and public import, because of a series of lectures on the Biblical stories of Genesis I prepared, delivered live (at the Isabel Bader Theatre in Toronto) and then posted on YouTube (playlist here) and in podcast form.

Since their posting, beginning in May of 2017, these lectures have received about 10 million hits (as well as an equal or greater number of downloads). The first lecture alone, on the first sentence of Genesis, has, alone, garnered 3.7 million of those, which makes it the most well-received of all the talks I have ever posted online. I have received correspondence in great volume from religious people all over the world, Jews, Christians, Buddhists and Muslims alike—and an equally large number from atheists—all telling me that my psychological take on the Genesis material resonated very strongly with their faith, or that it helped them understand for the first time the value of these stories. You can see this for yourself by reading the comments on the YouTube channel, which are remarkably civilized and positive, by modern social media standards. I don’t think there is another modern religious/psychological phenomenon or happening that is genuinely comparable. It’s also the case that my books, 12 Rules for Life and Maps of Meaning both rely heavily on Judeo-Christian thinking, and are predicated on the idea that the stories that make up such thought constitute the bedrock of our civil, peaceful and productive society. The former has now sold 3 million copies (one million in tongues other than English), and will be translated into 50 languages; the latter, a much older book, was recently a New York Times bestseller in audio format. This volume of interest is clear indication of the widespread cross-cultural appeal of the work that I am doing.

In the fall, I am planning to produce a series of lectures on the Exodus stories. I presume they will have equal drawing power. I thought that I could extend my knowledge of the relevant stories by spending time in Cambridge, and that doing so would be useful for me, for faculty members who might be interested in speaking with me, and to the students. I also regarded it as a privilege and an opportunity. I believed (and still believe) that collaborating with the Faculty of Divinity on such a project would constitute an opportunity of clear mutual benefit. Finally, I thought that making myself more knowledgeable about relevant Biblical matters by working with the experts there would be of substantive benefit to the public audience who would eventually receive the resultant lectures.

Now the Divinity school has decided that signaling their solidarity with the diversity-inclusivity-equity mob trumps that opportunity–or so I presume. You see, I don’t yet know, because (and this is particularly appalling) I was not formally notified of this decision by any representative of the Divinity school. I heard about the rescinded offer through the grapevine, via a colleague and friend, and gathered what I could about the reasons from social media and press coverage (assuming that CUSU has at least something to do with it).

I would also like to point out something else. As I already noted, the Divinity Faculty (@CamDivinity) tweeted their decision to rescind, consciously making this a public issue. This is inexcusable, in my estimation, given (1) that they did not equally publicize the initial agreement/invitation (which has to be considered an event of equal import) and (2) that they implied that I came cap-in-hand to the school for the fellowship. This is precisely  the kind of half-truth particularly characteristic of those who deeply practice to deceive, as the fellowship offer was a consequence of mutual discussion between those who invited me to Cambridge in July and my subsequent formal request, and not something I had dreamed up on my own.

It’s not going to make much difference to my future, in some sense. I have more opportunities at the moment than I can keep track of, let alone (let’s say) capitalize on. It’s a complex and surreally fortunate position to occupy, and I’m not taking it for granted, but it happens to be true. In the fall, therefore, I will produce the lectures I plan to produce on Exodus, regardless of whether they occur in the UK or in Canada or elsewhere, and they will attract whatever audience remains interested. But I think that it is deeply unfortunate that the authorities at the Divinity school in Cambridge decided that kowtowing to an ill-informed, ignorant and ideologically-addled mob trumped participating in an extensive online experiment in mass Christian and psychological education. Given the continued decline of church attendance, the rise in atheistic or agnostic sentiment, the increasing irrelevance of theological education and the collapse in interest in such matters among young people, wiser and more profound decisions might have been made.

You see, it matters whether people around the world understand these ancient stories. It deeply matters. We are becoming unmoored, because we no longer share the structure these stories undergird. This is psychologically destabilizing. It’s producing a pathological and desperate nihilism that is increasingly common and, at the same time, a pronounced proclivity for the ideological certainty that mimics but cannot replace true religious belief. Both consequences are bound to be, as the evidence certainly indicates, divisive and truly dangerous.

I think the Faculty of Divinity made a serious error of judgement in rescinding their offer to me (and I’m speaking about those unnamed persons who made that specific decision). I think they handled publicizing the rescindment in a manner that could hardly have been more narcissistic, self-congratulatory and devious.

I believe that the parties in question don’t give a damn about the perilous decline of Christianity, and I presume in any case that they regard that faith, in their propaganda-addled souls, as the ultimate manifestation of the oppressive Western patriarchy, despite their hypothetical allegiance to their own discipline.

I think that it is no bloody wonder that the faith is declining (and with it, the values of the West, as it fragments) with cowards and mountebanks of the sort who manifested themselves today at the helm.

I wish them the continued decline in relevance over the next few decades that they deeply and profoundly and diligently work toward and deserve.



P.S. I also find it interesting and deeply revealing that I know the names of the people who invited me, both informally and formally, but the names of the people who have disinvited me remain shrouded in exactly the kind of secrecy that might be expected from hidden, conspiratorial, authoritarian and cowardly bureaucrats. How many were there? No one knows. By what process did they come to the decision (since there were obviously people who wanted me there)? No one knows. On what grounds was the decision made? That has not been revealed. What role was played by pressure from, for example, the CUSU? That’s apparently no one’s business. It is on such ground that tyranny does not so much grow as positively thrive.

P.P.S. Here’s something from Vice-Chancellor Professor Stephen Toope of the University of Cambridge that’s worth consideration, in the current context (the described “openness” is apparently part of the university’s declared strategic initiatives regarding (what else) equality and diversity (bold mine):

One very specific aspect of…openness is being inclusive, and open to diversity in all its forms – diversity of interests and beliefs, of gender, of religion, of sexual identity, of ethnicity, of physical ability.

Labels: , ,

Bad parents post

I've been saying this for years. Now the children are finally getting old enough to speak for themselves:
My parents had long ago made the rule that my siblings and I weren’t allowed to use social media until we turned 13, which was late, compared to many of my friends who started using  Instagram, Wattpad, and Tumblr when we were 10 years old.

While I was sometimes curious what my sister was laughing at and commenting on, and what my friends liked about it, I didn’t really have much of an interest in social media, and since I didn’t have a smartphone and wasn’t allowed to join any sites at all until I was 13, it wasn’t much of an issue for me.

Then, several months ago, when I turned 13, my mom gave me the green light and I joined Twitter and Facebook. The first place I went, of course, was my mom’s profiles. That’s when I realized that while this might have been the first time I was allowed on social media, it was far from the first time my photos and stories had appeared online. When I saw the pictures that she had been posting on Facebook for years, I felt utterly embarrassed, and deeply betrayed.

There, for anyone to see on her public Facebook account, were all of the embarrassing moments from my childhood: The letter I wrote to the tooth fairy when I was five years old, pictures of me crying when I was a toddler, and even vacation pictures of me when I was 12 and 13 that I had no knowledge of. It seemed that my entire life was documented on her Facebook account, and for 13 years, I had no idea.
I realize this will be a very unpopular opinion in some circles, but I firmly believe that posting pictures of your children in public is fundamentally bad parenting. I wonder how many parent-child relationships will be permanently damaged because Mommy or Daddy was using their children to attention-whore.

Labels:

Mailvox: May out by Monday

From the Brexit Insider:
Reports in this morning’s press are that there are several Brexiteer ministers on their way to Downing Street to tell Theresa May to get out. There was already suggestions a couple of days ago that Brexiteer MPs were prepared to abstain in a ‘no confidence’ vote in the House of Commons in order to bring down what is at least theoretically their own party’s government.

Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, if the ‘no confidence’ vote was lost by the government, there would then be 2 weeks for the parties to attempt to form a government before a general election was mandated. In this time frame, they would defenestrate Theresa May and select a new leader.

The significant problems with this plan are:

1) No guarantee that Theresa May would not Cling-on like a limpet on Noah’s Ark to seek the survival of her Globalist ideology.

2) There wouldn’t be time for the Conservative Party to go through the process of consulting the members around the country on the leadership choice, and the parliamentary party are majority Remainers anyway, so the result could be another Remainer Prime Minister to continue the circus.
It looks to me as if No Deal is going to take place by default on March 29th, the various shenanigans by the EU, Her Majesty's Government, and the British Parliament notwithstanding.

UPDATE: No Deal announced tonight?
The British political journalists that were on their way to Brussels on the Eurostar for tomorrow’s EU council meeting are apparently scrambling to get back to London for an announcement in Downing Street at 8pm GMT. Others are being told to cancel their dinner plans.

Note that this will be after the 1922 committee meeting of Conservative Party backbenchers that she has been politely invited (read: ordered) to attend. That probably starts at about 6pm, although last time it started at 5pm.

There are reports that Macron has refused any extension, although Juncker is prepared to allow up to 22 May, the day before the Euro parliament elections. The Elysée has however stated that, “No decision will be taken by France before the European council”. Hopefully French intransigence can save Britain from Theresa May’s dithering, and we can have a rousing chorus of La Marseillaise.

UPDATE: It looks like a General Election is going to be announced. The bookies have suspended betting on one.

Labels: ,

Voxiversity 012: The Socio-Sexual Hierarchy: Gamma


The producer did a great job on this one in covering for my failure to provide him with usable video. I filmed it on the same day as the Alpha video, but didn't bother to check the recording, so I didn't realize that the camera's autofocus completely ignored me and thereby rendered the entire video useless. But we had a solid audio track and the content was good, so we decided to go ahead and run with it anyhow. I will say, however, that despite the higher degree of difficulty involved, the ending is phenomenal.
This guy gets it, right down to the formatting. A comment on YouTube:
Listen, Vox. Let me make this as simple as possible for you and your audience. I’ll try to make it easy for you, but you have to understand where I’m coming from. Everywhere I go people tell me I’m smart. They look up to me. They respect me. I’m an authority on these things and I want you to know that. No one really believes that you’re leading this organization in the right direct. Ackchshually, I’m not going to tell you and your audience what needs to be done. I’m going to spare you colloquial diction and vernacular too. Do you realize what you just passed up? I told you in your comment section to listen to me. But you banned me. I was debate team champ in 10th grade. My teachers thought of me as the next great orator and thinker in Western civilization, “A Son of Cicero if there ever was one,” said my AP history teacher. It really doesn’t compute does it? Your obsequiousness to tedious childlike infantilisms really knows no bounds. You know what, Vox? I’m glad I ran into your operation on Vox Populi. It reminded me that I’ve outgrown you. Have a great day, chump.
Flawless execution. Truly well done. 

Labels: ,

Google fined another $1.7 billion

Google's European fines are now up to $9.5 billion in the last three years.
European Union regulators have hit Google with a $1.68 billion (1.49 billion euro/£1.28billion) fine for or blocking rival online search advertisers. It is the third multi-billion dollar EU antitrust penalty for Google's parenting company Alphabet in just two years. The European Commission, which said the fine accounted for 1.29 percent of Google's turnover in 2018, said in a statement that the anti-competitive practices had lasted a decade.

The EU's competition commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, announced the results of the long-running probe at a news conference in Brussels on Wednesday.

'Today's decision is about how Google abused its dominance to stop websites using brokers other than the AdSense platform,' Vestager said.

The commission found that Google and its parent company, Alphabet, breached EU antitrust rules by imposing restrictive clauses in contracts with websites that used AdSense, preventing Google rivals from placing their ads on these sites.

Today's EU case concerned AdSense for Search, which placed a Google search bar on the website in question, then used any searches made through it to tailor the content of adverts that users were shown.

For example, if a user searched for 'shoes', they would be shown articles about shoes as well as adverts for shoes. But Google also made publishers sign contracts which initially forbid them from using a rival search engine on the same site, and later forced them to make Google's search the most prominent used on the site. Google also required publishers to reserve the most profitable advertising spaces for adverts they supplied, and forced them to seek written approval any time they wanted to change the way rival adverts were displayed

The EU found these restrictions stifled innovation and denied rivals the chance to compete.

Google 'prevented its rivals from having a chance to innovate and to compete in the market on their merits,' Vestager said.  'Advertisers and website owners, they had less choice and likely faced higher prices that would be passed on to consumers.'

Last year Vestager hit the company with a record $5bn (£3.8bn / €4.3bn) fine following an investigation into its Android operating system. In 2017, she slapped Google with a $2.84bn (£2.1bn / €2.42bn) fine in a case involving its online shopping search results.
I strongly suspect this is why YouTube appears to be much less inclined to interfere with European-based AdSense accounts than US-based ones. Given that the EU has been willing to fine Alphabet a cumulative $10 billion for interfering with rival corporations, imagine how high the fines for consumer actions could be.

The tech giants are under the mistaken impression that the contracts they impose on everyone that declare they can do anything they want at any time to anyone are going to hold up in court. As Indiegogo is already learning, that is absolutely not true; to the contrary, the mere fact that they blithely impose these "agreements" on everyone without any input from the other parties is actually one of the more powerful legal weapons against them.

What their lawyers don't seem to have grasped is that the legacy terminology that was perfectly sufficient when a free service was provided does not supersede centuries of contract law precedent once money starts changing hands.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

FYI: for the subscribers

The entire audiobook of SJWS ALWAYS DOUBLE DOWN is now available to UNAUTHORIZED.TV subscribers. Six hours and 34 minutes.

Also, after reviewing his finances, Owen Benjamin has contemplated his sins and publicly apologized.

Labels: ,

Mailvox: free trade and satanic sovereignty

They have no response to the free mobility of trade argument and they know it. It's very amusing to see how they are thrashing about and repeating their rhetorical dogma as if it is even relevant. A reader emails concerning a pair of Gene Epstein's appearances on Tom Woods's show:

Vox Day if you think that people should not buy foreign goods, foreign made goods, then exercise your individual sovereignty and stop buying foreign made goods. There is no argument there. The only argument is, do you have a right to not tell me to buy foreign goods. Of course you do not. But you certainly have the right to tell others, join me, in not buying foreign made goods.That’s your choice. So in a way, there should be no argument, between the likes of us and Vox Day, so long as he recognizes that he has no right to pass a law forcing us to not buy foreign made goods. So that approach, the understanding of individual sovereignty, I think is at the core of any vision that you want to live."
- October 31, 2018

To which I respond: the concept of individual sovereignty is quite literally satanic. And a nation absolutely has the right to pass a law forcing its nationals to not buy foreign-made goods or utilize foreign-provided services, because if it does not do so, it will cease to be a nation. And every nation has the right to a) exist, and, b) defend itself.

When you had me on to address the protectionism of VOX DAY awhile back, I made the same point. My point, in this case again, is that Dan(McCarthy) is free to start a company called Buy American. A website that would sell consumer goods that are domestically produced and that back ventures that only employ American workers. He might get Ross Perot himself, who is still alive, to back it, along with the Sharks( TV Show Shark Tank). I would not participate, mainly because I regard myself as a Citizen of the World and from that position, I observe that the poor people of the world do not reside in the U.S. but in countries like China and I regard it as an inspiring win-win, that stores like Walmart can lift the living standards of Americans by selling them cheap goods, made by cheap labor abroad , while also lifting that cheap labor out of grinding $2 a day poverty.

So as a libertarian, I would have no right to object to Dan’s privately backed, buy American, American nationalism, conservatism venture. But what Dan is actually proposing, again, as VOX DAY was, as so many of the protectionists do, always, is to use the iron fist of government to force me to buy American against my will. As a flexible libertarian, I will tell Dan that he bares a very heavy burden of proof, if he wants to deny my rights in this way.

So our disagreement is hardly a level playing field, but even if there were a level playing field between us, Dan’s arguments are not convincing. So again, having established that Tom, and again, it’s the sort of thing I want us all to say to socialists and protectionists, the free market offers you the opportunity to practice your values. Get enough people to agree with you and you’ll become a powerful force in the free market. We might disagree but we have no right to object to what you are doing, so long as you do not impose the iron fist of government on us. Now, of course, now we can get to the consequentialist side of the argument....

Notice that Gene Epstein is not an American. He has no interest in the American nation. He is, to the contrary, "a Citizen of the World". So, he has absolutely no rights that Americans need to respect. Protectionism is not merely beneficial economically, it is not merely necessary for a nation to thrive, it is a necessary policy for any nation that wishes to survive.

Labels: , ,

DNA supports a Jack the Ripper theory

DNA isn't just useful for exploding fairy tales about evolution by natural selection, but can help unravel historical mysteries too:
Research by Jari Louhelainen, senior lecturer in molecular biology at Liverpool John Moores University, and David Miller, reader in molecular andrology at the University of Leeds, claims to shed new light on the notorious serial killer. In an abstract of their research published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences, Louhelainen and Miller explained they used what is, to their knowledge, the only remaining physical evidence linked to the murders, recovered from one of the Ripper’s famous victims at the scene of her death.

Jack the Ripper is thought to have claimed the lives of at least five women in the Whitechapel area of London between August and November 1888. However, the identity of the notorious murderer remains shrouded in mystery.

Science Magazine reports that the scientists analyzed a blood-stained shawl from Catherine Eddowes, the fourth of the so-called “canonical five” Jack the Ripper victims. Eddowes was killed on Sept. 30, 1888, and her badly mutilated body was found on Whitechapel’s Mitre Square.

The scientists’ genetic testing linked Aaron Kosminski, a 23-year-old Polish barber living in London, to the crimes, according to Science Magazine. Although identified as a Jack the Ripper suspect, police are said to have lacked sufficient evidence to charge Kosminski for the murders.
I thought that name sounded familiar. He's been one of the leading candidates from the start. And, of course, Kominski wasn't Polish at all, but (((Polish))).
Aaron Kosminski was a Polish born Jew who emigrated with his family to England in 1881. Born in 1865 in the Polish town of Klodawa, which was then part of the Russian Empire, Kosminski’s family fled to England to escape persecution by the Russian government.

Kosminski lived with his 2 brothers and 1 sister in the heart of Whitechapel, and was said to have worked as a hairdresser. His home, which was listed as being on Greenfield Street, was in the direct vicinity of where Elizabeth Stride was murdered in the early morning hours of September 30, 1888.
I'm not even a little bit surprised Kominski would turn out to be the culprit, in light of the police notes that the one of the only eyewitnesses refused to testify on the grounds of the man he had seen was a fellow Jew.
Swanson goes on to note in the memoirs that the witness would not testify because he was also Jewish and did not want to carry the guilt of presenting evidence responsible for the execution of a fellow Jew.
One can't help but notice that the New York Post article goes out of its way to omit all reference to the killer's nationality, despite the fact that it is highly pertinent to the case.

Labels: ,

Migration is genetic genocide

Martin van Creveld has taught you this. I've repeated the warning over and over again. Now genetic science is making it indubitably clear that mass migration is not only war and replacement, but genetic genocide.
Since the beginning of human migration, the Iberian Peninsula—home of modern-day Spain and Portugal—has been a place where the cultures of Africa, Europe, and the Mediterranean have mingled.

In a new paper in the journal Science, a group of 111 population geneticists and archaeologists charted 8,000 years of genetics in the region. They paint a picture that shows plenty of genetic complexity, but that also hints at a single mysterious migration about 4,500 years ago that completely shook up ancient Iberians’ DNA.

The team searched DNA evidence for clues to how and when various populations became part of the Iberian Peninsula’s gene pool. They sequenced the genomes of 271 ancient Iberians, then combined that information with previously published data about 132 other ancient peninsula dwellers.

Beginning in the Bronze Age, the genetic makeup of the area changed dramatically. Starting in about 2,500 B.C., genes associated with people from the steppes near the Black and Caspian seas, in what is now Russia, can be detected in the Iberin gene pool. And from about 2,500 B.C. much of the population’s DNA was replaced with that of steppe people.... Though 60 percent of the region’s total DNA remained the same, the Y chromosomes of the inhabitants were almost entirely replaced by 2,000 B.C. That suggests a massive influx of men from the steppes, since Y chromosomes are carried only by men.

“It looks like the influence was very male dominated,” says Miguel Vilar, a genetic anthropologist who serves as senior program officer for the National Geographic Society.

Who were these men—and did they come in peace?
They obviously didn't come in peace. They invaded the land, slaughtered the men, and raped the women. That's what mass migration inevitably entails, and why it the large-scale movement of peoples is actually considerably WORSE than simple international war between nation-states.

Just ask the American Indian.

Labels: , ,

Monday, March 18, 2019

Amazon bans black history books

At least Amazon waited until Black History Month was over before banning four books by black authors about black history:
The banning of four Nation of Islam Black history books by Amazon, the largest bookseller in the world, provides a perfect opportunity to examine the wickedly racist ways Jewish power is wielded in America. Amazon provided no warning, no reason, no hearing, and no opportunity to respond—it was a blatant mockery of Amazon founder Jeffrey Bezos’s own creed, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” It is, however, perfect proof of what The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad said: the mental resurrection of Black people will anger our oppressors and cause them to react punitively and viciously.
This is just another exhibit in the growing divide between the Democratic establishment and the grass roots of the party. This is why some Republicans are foolishly calling for what they describe as a Jexodus, which is insanely stupid if one considers what happened when the neocons were welcomed into the conservative movement.

Labels: ,

Premium content test

I've uploaded a 90-minute extended audio sample of Cuckservative to UNAUTHORIZED in the book section. Subscribers should be able to access and download it. The sample contains what I consider to be the three most important chapters, on the myth of the melting pot, the history of the US conservative movement, and Churchianity.

I'm thinking of adding two new Premium sections for subscribers. One is video book reviews in which I'll review a book I've read; I find it easier to talk about books in that context than write about them. The other is history readings that I consider to be particularly important. I highlight stuff all the time while I'm reading that never makes it to this blog, and that might be a good way of actually getting the information out to interested parties. The reason this strikes me as important is that the only video I've had banned from YouTube, and my only strike - now expired - was nothing more than a reading from The Byzantine Empire by Charles Oman.

Year Zero is an ever-present goal of the godless, which is why they hate history. I think it therefore behooves us to preserve it. Anyhow, if you're Unauthorized, let me know if the Paid Only access works for you and what you think of the two proposed new sections.

Labels: ,

Attack in Utrecht

It appears those dreaded white supremacist eco-fascists have struck again, this time in Utrecht, Holland:
A gunman has opened fire inside a tram and at several other locations in the Dutch city of Utrecht, authorities say.

Several people have been injured and one is feared to have died, media reports say.

Police say the gunman is still at large. Trains and trams have stopped running and schools have been asked to keep their doors closed.

Counter-terror police reportedly say the shooting "appears to be a terrorist attack".
In response, the Netherland Antilles have announced new gun control legislation....

UPDATE: Dutch police are reporting that the white supremacist eco-fascist responsible for the shootings is a Turk.

Labels:

Evolution is out of time

I discussed this a bit on last night's Darkstream, but because my grasp of the technicalities of how genetics work is close to nonexistent, I didn't even try to delve into the details. It's much better to simply read the linked articles; I leave it to those more versed in the subject to determine how valid the reports of the massive gap between the oft-reported 98 percent estimated similarity between the chimp and human genomes and what genetic scientists are actually seeing now as their ability to analyze the various genomes improves.

The first exhibit is an interview with a creationist geneticist, which will no doubt be improperly dismissed by scientistry fetishists with an appeal to the genetic fallacy.
Dr. Tomkins: My motivation started when I arrived here and was given the task of researching the human-chimpanzee similarity issue because people ask about this in churches. They hear the claim that humans and chimps are 98 to 99% similar. People want to know if that’s true. Before working here, I’d not investigated that issue. I ran a genome center for over five years and investigated various plants and animals but never the human-chimpanzee comparison. I went into it with an open mind and began reading all the literature on the subject—this started about eight years ago. I looked at the top six scientific publications that proposed a 98 to 99% DNA similarity between modern humans and modern chimpanzees.

Brian: A 98 to 99% genetic similarity between modern humans and modern chimps—why is that important?

Dr. Tomkins: It’s very important to theoretical evolutionists. The 98 to 99% claim is a theory—it’s speculative. They need a similarity that close to have humans and chimps evolve in the alleged three- to six-million-year timespan from a supposed human-chimpanzee common ancestor. Their statistical models need that 98 to 99% similarity.

Brian: What did you find in the literature?

Dr. Tomkins: The first thing I noticed when I began reading these articles was that researchers were throwing out a lot of data. They were cherry-picking the areas of DNA between humans and chimps that were highly similar and throwing out areas, including areas that would not line up properly. Areas that don’t line up are dissimilar. When I researched the data, I was coming up with DNA similarities between 81 to 86% when I included the dissimilar data. I published a paper on this.1 This is way outside the realm of theoretical evolution.

Brian: What should the evolutionary community say about this?

Dr. Tomkins: They have reacted to a lot of my research since that first paper. There’s a lot of DNA sequence data that is publicly available in databases. I began working with the data myself, and over a number of years I refined my techniques. I used an algorithm developed by evolutionists that turned out to be a bad algorithm—so there’s been a lot of trial and error. But I finally got to the point where I published a paper in 2016.2 It was the most comprehensive study I’ve done yet, and I looked at all 101 data sets that went into originally building the chimpanzee genome.

I sampled 25,000 sequences at random from each of the data sets and then began analyzing and comparing them to human. Over half of the data sets were extremely similar to human, and the other half were extremely dissimilar to human. It appeared the initial chimpanzee genome was contaminated with human DNA, which is a huge problem in genomics.

There’s a number of studies by secular researchers showing that many public DNA databases, from bacteria to fish, have significant levels of human contamination. Human DNA literally gets into the samples. Contamination is a major issue. Human DNA comes from researchers’ fingers, coughing, sneezing, etc., and it gets into the samples. Now researchers are taking greater steps to alleviate that problem. This was especially prevalent back in the earliest phases of genome projects, when the chimpanzee was sequenced.

Brian: Wouldn’t some of the human DNA that made it into the raw data affect the results of any comparison analyses?

Dr. Tomkins: It has a huge effect because the chimpanzee genome is stitched together using the human genome as a scaffold. It’s like a puzzle—researchers used the human DNA “picture on the box” to assemble the chimp genome. The chimp DNA sequences used were all about 750 bases long. Not only was the chimp genome built using the human genome as a guide, it also has human DNA contamination in it, so it showed a lot of similarity from the contamination.

Brian: Even with those factors in place that skewed the data to a more human genome, is it closer to the 98% or the 86% maximum you observed?

Dr. Tomkins: It’s difficult to determine because it is a flawed product. I based my research on human-chimp similarity on the half of the data sets that appear to have much less human DNA. Based on my work, I’m seeing not more than an 85% DNA similarity of chimpanzee to human, and that’s a maximum. It’s probably less than that.
The second exhibit is even more interesting, because an evolutionary biologist who is the Professor of Evolutionary Genomics at the University of London has been seeing much the same thing in his review of the various chimp-human genomic studies:
When assessing the total similarity of the human genome to the chimp genome, we also need to bear in mind that roughly 5% of the human genome has not been fully assembled yet, so the best we can do for that 5% is predict how similar it will be to the chimpanzee genome. We do not yet know for sure. The chimpanzee genome assembly is less well assembled, so in future we may assemble parts of the chimpanzee genome that are similar to the human genome – this is another source of uncertainty to keep in mind.

To come up with the most accurate current assessment that I could of the similarity of the human and chimpanzee genome, I downloaded from the UCSC genomics website the latest alignments (made using the LASTZ software) between the human and chimpanzee genome assemblies, hg38 and pantro6. See discussion post #35 for details. This gave the following for the human genome:

4.06% had no alignment to the chimp assembly
5.18% was in CNVs relative to chimp
1.12% differed due to SNPs in the one-to-one best aligned regions
0.28% differed due to indels within the one-to-one best aligned regions

The percentage of nucleotides in the human genome that had one-to-one exact matches in the chimpanzee genome was 84.38%

In order to assess how improvements in genome assemblies can change these figures, I did the same analyses on the alignment of the older PanTro4 assembly against Hg38 (see discussion post #40). The Pantro4 assembly was based on a much smaller amount of sequencing than the Pantro6 assembly (see discussion post #39). In this Pantro4 alignment:

6.29% had no alignment to the chimp assembly
5.01% was in CNVs relative to chimp
1.11% differed due to SNPs in the one-to-one best aligned regions
0.28% differed due to indels within the one-to-one best aligned regions

The percentage of nucleotides in the human genome that had one-to-one exact matches in the chimpanzee genome was 82.34%.

Thus the large improvement in the chimpanzee genome assembly between PanTro4 and PanTro6 has led to an increase in CNVs detected, and a decrease in the non-aligning regions. It has only increased the one-to-one exact matches from 82.34% to 84.38% even though the chimpanzee genome assembly is at least 8% more complete (I think) in PanTro6.
I have already shown that it is highly improbable that the speed of mutational fixation is sufficient to account for the estimated 98 percent similar relationship which needs to account for 30 million fixed mutations since the Last Chimp-Human Common Ancestor, so this massive increase in the observed difference between the two genomes, which is presently calculated to end up somewhere between 84.38 to 93.43 percent, is enough to not only drive the final nail in the Neo-Darwinian coffin, but wrap it in iron bands, encase it in concrete, and drop it into the Marianas Trench.

Because what we're seeing here is inept statistical wizardry that involves everything from contaminated evidence to cherry-picked data and the ridiculous assumption that literally ALL of the remaining unknown areas will, in the future, be found to perfectly align with orthodox Neo-Darwinian theory. And the priests of TENS are still desperately clinging to that improbable assumption even though it was only proved to be correct for 25.5 percent of the area that was filled in over the course of the seven years that passed between the publications of PanTro4 and PanTro6.

Of course, no one here will be even remotely surprised to observe that Prof. Buggs's original 2008 prediction was too low because, in the 2005 paper upon which he relied, the biologists got the math wrong.

Labels: ,

Older Posts