Charging into the Minefield of Genes and Racial Difference

Arthur Allen, New York Times, May 16, 2014

Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference. {snip}

Contemporary researchers have found it useful to examine genetic variations that affect traits like diabetes in Native Americans or high blood pressure in African-Americans. But in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States have largely avoided the classification of races as a “futile exercise,” in the words of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza; the very concept of race is a matter of scientific debate.

In A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History however, Nicholas Wade argues that scientists need to get over their hang-ups and jump into studies of racial difference. “The intellectual barriers erected many years ago to combat racism now stand in the way of studying the recent evolutionary past,” he writes.

Mr. Wade, a longtime science writer for The New York Times, draws on the wealth of evolutionary data that has emerged from the decoding of human genomes. This research has enabled scientists to imagine our prehistory with more precision, and the picture is one of unexpectedly significant genetic change since many of our ancestors left Africa. Since this evolution affected traits such as skin color, body hair and the tolerance of alcohol, milk and high altitude, why not intelligence and social behavior as well? Mr. Wade asks.

The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet. To build a case with the evidence at hand requires a great deal of speculation, with the inevitable protrusion of the nonscientific worldview.

Mr. Wade presents a few scattered genetic studies and attempts to weld them into a grand theory of global history for the past 50,000 years. Where Jared Diamond argued in “Guns, Germs and Steel” that environment and geography enabled Europe to develop a highly successful civilization, Mr. Wade says environmental pressures led to genetic differences that account for much of that advantage. “The rise of the West,” he writes, “is an event not just in history but also in human evolution.”

Conservative scholars like the political scientist Francis Fukuyama have long argued that social institutions and culture explain why Europe beat Asia to prosperity, and why parts of the Mideast and Africa continue to suffer destabilizing violence and misery.

Mr. Wade takes this already controversial argument a step further, contending that “slight evolutionary differences in social behavior” underlie social and cultural differences. A small but consistent divergence in a racial group’s tendency to trust outsiders–and therefore to accept central rather than tribal authority–could explain “much of the difference between tribal and modern societies,” he writes.


Mr. Wade occasionally drops in broad, at times insulting assumptions about the behavior of particular groups without substantiating the existence of such behaviors, let alone their genetic basis. Writing about Africans’ economic condition, for example, Mr. Wade wonders whether “variations in their nature, such as their time preference, work ethic and propensity to violence, have some bearing on the economic decisions they make.”


Mr. Wade acknowledges that specific evidence for the influence of “social behavior” genes is quite limited. The one example he presents repeatedly is the MAOA 2R variant, the so-called warrior gene that has been linked to violent behavior in men abused as children and is more common in blacks than whites or Asians. Mr. Wade admits that such genes at most create a tendency to violence, and adds that there may be other, yet undiscovered violence-susceptibility genes that could skew the racial picture.


When it comes to his leitmotif–the need for scientists to drop “politically correct” attitudes toward race–Mr. Wade displays surprisingly sanguine assumptions about the ability of science to generate facts free from the cultural mesh of its times. He argues that because the word “racism” did not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary until 1910, racism is a “modern concept, and that pre-eugenics studies of race were “reasonably scientific.” This would surely surprise any historian of European colonies in Africa or the Americas.


The philosopher Ludwik Fleck once wrote, “ ‘To see’ means to recreate, at a suitable moment, a picture created by the mental collective to which one belongs.” While there is much of interest in Mr. Wade’s book, readers will probably see what they are predisposed to see: a confirmation of prejudices, or a rather unconvincing attempt to promote the science of racial difference.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • DaveMed

    What a long-winded way of saying, “We don’t like this kind of science!”

    • NeanderthalDNA

      Seemed to be saying…

      “You might not want to read this. I’m qualified and inclined to deconstruct and dismiss this book but this article was the best I could do.”


    • Nancy Thomas

      Yeah, they just don’t like it! Wah!!

    • Erasmus

      When any leftist decries the assertion that genes contribute greatly to behavior, throw back at him that, still, the lefties have been claiming for years that genes predispose individuals to same-sex attraction.

      Try as they might, they can’t have their cake and eat it too. Either genes contribute to behavior, or they don’t.

      • Conway Redding

        Erasmus, it’s not a question of whether or not genes contribute to human behavior, but, for any given human behavior, how much influence genes exert. So it’s not as simple as ” Either genes contribute to behavior, or they don’t.”

  • JohnEngelman

    Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference.

    – Arthur Allen, New York Times, May 16, 2014

    specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm.

    – Charles Murray from “The Inequality Taboo”

    • LHathaway

      Glad you’re on our side.

      • JohnEngelman

        I am a convinced race realist. That should be obvious in nearly everything I post here.

        • RealisticGuy

          How is it you manage to get the posts of others deleted? What connection do you have so strong, that even though Taylor has affirmed a position many times, that is closer to mine than yours, the moderator will spring to your defense when you are intellectually incapable of defending your ideas?

          I’m truly curious. Do you give money to be allowed to spout your nonsense here?

          • JohnEngelman

            Read this at the top of the page. It answers your questions: “We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate.”

          • RealisticGuy

            I didn’t say anything other than the truth. I said that you don’t care for European interests. I think it adds to everyone’s perspective to know where you are coming from.

            I used light cursing, the “D word”. If that offends the moderators here, I’ll refrain in the future.

          • JohnEngelman

            What you said is not the truth. I care about the interests of decent people throughout the world, regardless of nation, ethnicity, or race.

          • RealisticGuy

            You don’t think that the United States, and all ethnic European countries should import as many Asians as possible?

            That is what we are talking about here. Why would you bother trying to side step? As if I’m going to let you off.

          • JohnEngelman

            As if I’m going to let you off.

            – RealisticGuy

            I am so scared.

          • RealisticGuy

            Is that all you are going to say for yourself?

            You are obviously incapable of defending your positions. Why do you persist in them? What is it in your heart that keeps you going, day after day, posting the nonsense you do?

            You still haven’t taken the time to go and answer my rebuttals. If you are right, surely you should be able to. If your ideas can’t bear questioning, then give them up and move on. It is the European thing to do.

          • JohnEngelman

            Not only am I able to defend my positions, but I am often able to defend them with appropriate quotations from Jared Taylor, and people he has invited to speak at American Renaissance conferences.

            I like decent blacks. I dislike nasty whites. Why is that nonsense?

          • Frank Morris

            He’s right about you Engelman. In a comment on American Thinker, you told me:

            “In order to disagree with me one does need to be motivated by some rather murky emotions.

            inferior quality of my detractors can be seen in the inferior quality
            of their comments. They do not present facts and insights. They express
            fear, anger, and hatred.

            They simply cannot stand to be reminded of the racial superiority of Jews and Orientals. I enjoy reminding them.”

            I hope lots of readers here get to see this before you get AR to take it down.

          • JohnEngelman

            Ashkenazi Jews and Orientals tend to be more intelligent than white Gentiles. Orientals have lower rates of crime and illegitimacy than white Gentiles. Do you dispute that?

          • Frank Morris

            That’s not what you said is it? You said Jews and Orientals are “racially superior” to whites. You do this all the time. You make these statements then act as if you didn’t.

          • JohnEngelman

            When I say that they are racially superior I mean that they have higher average IQ’s. The evidence for that is incontestable, and easy to find in articles that have appeared on American Renaissance.

          • Fathercoughlin

            You are a nasty specimen,tho you hide behind,”I was just saying the truth…”

          • Jacobite2

            Having higher IQs means that these groups have higher IQs. Where does the ‘racially superior’ come from? Maybe somebody else thinks being more athletic or having faster reflexes is superior. But it doesn’t matter anyhow. Normal people support and defend their own societies/races/religions/languages, even if they aren’t “superior”. In any event, they don’t give trophies to the team with the best statistics, but to the team that can defeat the other team on the field. On those fields, whites have done well from time to time. So have Jews. Let’s rock!

          • SoulInvictus

            What he doesn’t ever do is back up the IQ numbers by demonstrating it having created greater advancement or culture.
            Historical scientific, government, architectural, or artistic achievement of hebrews pre-German mixing, not much to speak of at all.
            Number of asian countries that would be preferable to live in over the ones with western heritages, a very short list.
            Over those same countries with tribe/leftist and minority problems removed, non-existent.

            That pretty much says it all, test taking numbers rendered irrelevant.

            It’s really ridiculous to get sucked into it, just down-vote and walk away. Save precious moments of your life. It’s the same leftist propaganda with a race realist candy coating to make it not taste like the poison it is.

          • PlasticBiddy

            Given his surname, what do you expect?

          • paul marchand

            “As a whole”. Example: clasp fingers of hands, alternating fingers. One side Jews/Asians, the other Caucasian.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            The Altright blogpits remind me of Castle Wolfenstein turned up on the difficulty level. There’s just so many of ’em and one eventually runs out of ammo.
            By the way – you skipped out on me over there and the Nazis started busting out those black and white Nazi style cartoons that depict the jew as some form of Jeff Goldblum crossed with a rat. Because I claimed to be perhaps 1/128th Jewish and took your side.
            Then you bugged out on me, Yellow John! (LOL). I felt like Willem Defoe’s character from “Platoon” trying to catch up with the helicopter, Nazis swarming all over me…
            But on topic…
            1. In regard to Orientals, 5-6 points is not much…
            a. I believe their is a greater variation in IQ among Whites which results in high numbers of geniuses as well as tards…perhaps more geniuses than the Oriental…
            b. As much as I hate “multiple intelligences” theory…there might be something to an “apples/oranges” sort of dynamic at work here…
            c. New research and measuring breakthroughs may indeed turn what is “solid science” today, based on our best information and measurement instruments, into sketchy, incomplete, and archaic (discredited) theory.
            All that said, as you know, I generally agree with you and love to watch you play “Castle Wolfenstein” with the you-know-who’s….

          • SoulInvictus

            I think I’ve got it figured out…
            JE is the equivalent of click-bait for Amren.
            If nothing else, you can’t argue that his appearance, though adding nothing useful to the conversation…or in any way advocating or favoring success for whites (which would seem by any logic that his rather than other folks’ post would get deleted), does tack on a few more hits for the page view count from a marketing perspective.
            Same reason HuffPo has side-boob coverage despite it seeming antithetical to the site’s original intent.

            My question is this then, can we trade JE for side-boob coverage?

          • RealisticGuy

            He doesn’t like to play with nazi’s. He likes to play with nationalists.

            To him, there is no difference between an actual hater of other races, and someone who loves their own people, an doesn’t want them diluted away.

            It’s no good that you were treated so shabbily on one of those blogs. but don’t judge them all the same on that basis.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I gotta admit…

            It was weird being treated like a Jew. Interesting experiment.

            Not entirely pleasant, you know?

          • RealisticGuy

            I’m sure there are many folk out there with some Jewish blood, who get no social advantage from it, who are indistinguishable from any other European, and who are in their hearts European — most of them probably don’t even know. Jews have been in Europe for a long, long time. There is obviously going to be some admixture from them.

            Those people, as far as I am concerned, should be considered European, and no mention made otherwise.

            You’re kindred to me, if you want to be.

            My perfect world isn’t one where we Europeans conquer all the other races and keep them in servitude, or annihilate them.

            There are people like that out there. Vicious men, often but not always idiots, who see what is happening to the US and Europe demographically, and just lose their minds. They can’t cope mentally, or emotionally with the situation. It’s to be expected; it’s the primitive brain, telling them to kill the other tribe.

            Those people, as I’ve often said, should stop advocating altogether, and leave it to those with more temperate dispositions.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            As I’ve blabbed before, here and elsewhere, I’m between 1/64th and 1/256 non-Aryan by my best, well informed, account. Actually I could be 1/512th…no…probably non-square between 1/256 and 1/512th….

            Lot depends on how Injun the Injun was. Jew on one side, injun on other – way back. White? Hell yes. Aryan? Yep, that too. Everything else came from England, Scotland, France and Sweden. Includes one of the first at Jamestown, an archer that accompanied William the Conqueror, Highlander retainers, staff officers of a Napoleonic Marshal, New England whalers, cattle men who drove herds of longhorns from the Mexican border to the Kansas City Royal.

            My siblings looked like Nordic gods as kids, but I came out dark like my father. Fair of skin and freckled, dark of hair with a slight ruddish tinged beard from my mom, almost black eyes like my pops.

            I’m one of those “darkish” Aryans who can pass for a wide variety of nationalities. Of course my “dark” features could easily be explained by the fact that light features developed later, evolutionarily speaking, and so in even the fairest populations with little or no admixture there were dark Aryans all along.

            Dark Aryan, dark enlightenment.

          • RealisticGuy

            I’ve got light hair, but dark eyes. I guess I’m in your club. My siblings have light hair and light eyes as well.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Yeah, I mean, to put it in perspective, when I was in Costa Rica I was considered something similar to “blonde”. “Macho” was more like…”fair” than “blonde”, especially when applied to males.

            Nonetheless I was mistaken by local for some form of Latin on more than one occasion. Either southern South American or Miami Cuban, lol…Speak the language fluently.

            I burned less easily than my siblings but never really got much of a “tan”. More of a weird orange right before angry redness and pain.

          • RealisticGuy

            I just burn. I’m one of those guys so pale they’re streaked with blue lines.

            Do you want children, and grandchildren who look like your grandparents? That’s what I want.

            I want them to identify with and love the same things I do.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Yeah absolutely. There’s nothing wrong with that at all. Commendable. There’s probably actually a scientifically verifiable maximum optimal degree of non-White admixture we could arrive at were we freely allowed to study such, I suppose.
            Until then a lot of it, especially in the American context, must come down to qualifying based on
            1. Look White. Plausibly at least.
            2. Act White. Mannerisms and culture.
            3. Live White. Try to uphold certain standards.
            4. Self identify as White. Heritage over genocide.
            3, 3 1/2 of these, works for me. Cream to top, dregs sink.

          • RealisticGuy

            For me it would be all 4.

            If it were someone that one of my children was to marry I’d want to make damn sure.

            But of course identify European, not white.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Number 1 is most important, sure, but our degenerate culture has damaged 2 through 4 pretty badly among many Whites. Some w*****s are indeed microcephalic fetal alcohol syndrome type degenerates, but some are social chameleons who have developed (irritating) survival skills and need a strong White person to (psychic-ly) slap some sense in them and train them to be White and dignified.

            Other Whites have fallen into all sorts of perversions and foolishness as a result of taking Boasian social science seriously and applying the standards of the whole to each individual but separate group. What an abomination.

            And under the regime of White Genocide, certainly many folk who should proudly identify as White instead choose some obscure little drop or two of non-White…to survive?

            What a pathetic survival.

          • RealisticGuy

            “Ensure my immortality”?! You’ve talked to me before haven’t you?

            It is a tough question. European looking people, with too much admixture, can have throwback looking kids. I’ve seen it before.

            My test would be to look at the grandparents, aunts, uncles, parents and siblings. Cousins are unreliable for obvious reasons. If they all look European, then I’d accept it. It sounds like she was beautiful. She’d probably improve the attractiveness of my family. Ha!

          • Hallie Eva

            Includes one of the first at Jamestown, an archer that accompanied William the Conqueror..

            I descend from that very same lineage.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Well howdy cousin, lol…

          • Hallie Eva

            Neanderthal, I have a mountain of genealogical information on our family if you are interested.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I would be. We “bow pluckers” have a fascinating history, have spread all over the country. Um…feel free to e-mail. I think its all in discus.

            Howdy cousin, lol…

          • Hallie Eva

            Howdy back at ya, cuz. First, we must establish if our post colonial families have branched out too far in opposite directions.

          • Sick of it

            Both of my parents have lighter hair than mine. Genetics can be weird sometimes. And, as I’ve stated before, my family’s DNA includes every eye and hair color.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Funny story…my red headed crazy momma had a dream about a week before I was born, that I came out an orangutan and started swinging on the light fixtures and breaking vases.

            When I did finally break out, I was covered with demonic red fuzz and looked like a hideous little apeling. I was butt ugly even after I molted the infernal fuzz for several weeks, but eventually the mark of the beast began to rub off and I plumped up into a pretty cute little fella.

            And my hair came out dark.

            Weird, eh?

          • Sick of it

            Not necessarily. No offense, but most babies come out looking like ugly old men. That doesn’t mean they aren’t precious, just saying. Also, I was very blond as a young child.

          • Hallie Eva

            I was covered with demonic red fuzz

            Neanderthal, the hairy condition observed on some neonates is called “lanugo,” from the Latin word for wool, lana.
            It is not unusual.

          • Sick of it

            The German military had many who were half-Jewish (!) under Hitler. Don’t believe propaganda, it’ll rot your brain.

          • RealisticGuy

            Don’t believe what propaganda?

          • Sick of it

            Even some of Hitler’s closest allies, at the head of the Third Reich, were Jewish. The usual propaganda always covers his visceral hatred and oppression of all Jews. His attempt to kill all Jews. The German Army’s composition alone refutes that.

          • RealisticGuy

            Oh. I didn’t think I had shown any bias in that regard.

            Hitler and the Zionists originally worked together, and had a close relationship.

            Jewish people in Europe didn’t want to go to Israel. The Zionist job of convincing them to go was very tough. This of course became much easier during and after the Second World War.

            The holocaust story created enormous political will in the West to aid the Jews in creating Israel.

            Without Hitler, Israel may have never existed.

          • Frank Morris

            You weren’t being treated like a Jew. You were being treated like a traitor.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            And why was I being treated so? How am I a traitor and to whom?

            To whom or what are my loyalties?

            1. Truth. Big T Truth, my God.

            2. Mankind.

            3. My Folk, which includes my family, friends, and my extended kin, my race. Mankind, by the way, is doomed if my Folk disappear. Truth will be hidden longer, if my Folk die out.


            I include as a welcome subset to “my folk” most Jews and certainly many people of some non or arguably Aryan or even White background, especially East Asian.

            There’s some rich liblefty slimeball Jews out there I’d love to string up, who I agree are poisoning and destroying our civilization. I’d appreciate and accept the help in this endeavor, however, of some good White non-liblefty Jews who feel the same as I do. We could then cooperate in stringing up non-Jews who sufficiently resemble the strung-up Jews, and eventually, with bodies of traitors dangling and rotting from every street light (to drive the point home)…

            What a wonderful world.

            I was just waxing metaphorically and all metaphor, like simile and rubber bands, snaps when stretched too far, so read into the above what you will, as I’m sure you shall.

          • Frank Morris

            You were defending Engelman’s assertions that Asians and “another group” are superior to whites.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I saw Engleman getting triple and quadruple teamed for (impoliticly) pointing out what appears to be fact for the umpteenth time.

            Engleman does not “rah rah team” enough, I get it, even kind of agree. But he has little opportunity to go there since he is constantly sought out and mobbed by those who consider him some kind of anti-Christ pariah (honestly it’s gone beyond rational, righteous indignation and entered the bloodthirsty, irrational, mob realm of human socio-psychological phenomena).

            Look, I call it like I see it, and I’m not always right but, I feel pretty good about my assessment of what’s really going on here.

            OK, he’s not entirely innocent and likes to debate, gets a thrill from the attention. Welcome to the human race.

            I guess two things have impelled my dangerous defense of the infamous leper, Yellow John Engleman.

            1. I like a fair fight and hate to see a brother man getting beaten, bullied, unfairly smeared or even hostilely harassed. My instinct, which has gotten me in a world of trouble I assure you, is to jump in and help the underdog here. All other factors ignored, that is.

            2. I intensely dislike your version of “White Nationalism” because it’s too close to Naziism.

          • Frank Morris

            You don’t even know my version of WN. Since I’ve never written a manifesto in the Disqus comments you couldn’t possibly. A return to pre-1965 immigration policy would probably satisfy me. Is that to close to Naziism for you?

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Perhaps I’m wrong.

            Point me to your favorite websites and I’ll get a good idea, likely.

            A return to pre-1965 immigration policy would be a great start, or goal.

            Look, I hate what’s happened to White Aryan nations, I just don’t blame everything on the Jews, who I consider close cousins to Aryan Whites (old Semitic Whites) and whose contribution to Western White civilization has been far more positive than negative.

            Jewish IQ, by the way, is factored into White IQ, I believe…

            If Engleman claimed Jews were “superior”, with no qualifiers, I think he proved he’s no Jew himself. Jews know better than to go there…

          • Frank Morris

            I don’t care if he’s a Jew or not. It is ridiculous to assert that I ever said such or cared, and is a really nifty way to attempt at casting aspersions that I’m some kind of Nazi.
            I’m going by what he says, not what I may or may not imagine him to be.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            This is a nice discussion, but I have to go.

            See ya in Valhalla, brother (but preferably after the evening postings first).

          • SoulInvictus

            “A return to pre-1965 immigration policy would be a great start, or goal.”

            A goal that is impossible precisely because of the JE’s of the world.

          • LACountyRedneck

            Johnny is big on Jews and Orientals. Certain J’s and O’s have higher IQ’s and a few other things I can’t mention here without getting booted. If you do you will be reminded by Johnny and Neanderthal why it isn’t good to talk about Jews here. I’m referring to the ones that do Whites harm. I give my post here a 50/50 chance of staying up.

          • JohnEngelman

            Thank you for your comments.

            As far as me being “beaten, bullied, unfairly smeared or even hostilely harassed,” save your compassion for those who gang up on me. None of them can stay in the ring with me.

            I only regret the quality of my opposition.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Oh I’m sure you can handle yourself.

          • JohnEngelman

            With difficulty.

            I appreciate your support.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I don’t like anything too closely resembling Castle Wolfenstein. Well, I liked their uniforms and admire their warrior accomplishments, but the whole package I detest, consider it’s remnants to be a greater obstacle to mainstream acceptance than bad messianic democratic totalitarian propaganda.

            I like the Propaganda of Truth. It’s the only propaganda I like.

          • LACountyRedneck

            Johnny is a traitor. He reminds us daily how he favors Jews and Orientals over Whites. We call him on it.
            “…he’s not entirely innocent and likes to debate, gets a thrill from the attention.” Most people here are not here for those reasons. Most of us are here to support and educate one-another. Engelman is here solely for himself. He pretends to support Whites (which he does favor over primates). Anyway, you know exactly why he is here and what he’s doing. It takes a while to get to know what Johnny is trying to accomplish here. Newcomers need a few posts to get it. He is of no benefit to Whites, unless you’re Jewish. He treats non-Jewish Whites like I treat Mestizos. “They’re better than blacks”.
            “I saw Engelman getting triple and quadruple teamed..”. I’m beginning to tear up. It’s about time Whites group together and hammer White hating scum. Usually N****** triple team Whites. Johnny’s a big boy. He can handle it. He’ll call daddy if there’s a problem.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            1. If you read that thing up top, POLITE debate is actually encouraged. If this is not why you come here, you should not engage in debates.

            2. Divide your post up some. You’re typing like you are really steamed and that greatly reduces the impact of your statements and your rep as an astute debater.

            3. I don’t think he hates Whites and inferring that someone is “scum” is not polite.

          • JohnEngelman

            Those who cannot refute my arguments try to change the subject by saying that I hate whites. This is an example of a number of fallacies, including Ad Hominem, red herring, and straw man.


            An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of “argument” has the following form:

            Person A makes claim X.

            Person B makes an attack on person A.

            Therefore A’s claim is false.

            The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).


            A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to “win” an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:

            Topic A is under discussion.

            Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).

            Topic A is abandoned.

            This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.


            The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of “reasoning” has the following pattern:

            Person A has position X.

            Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).

            Person B attacks position Y.

            Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

            This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.


            For the record, I do not hate whites. I hate no one because of his or her race.

          • LACountyRedneck

            “Divide your post up…” Spacing between paragraphs won’t hold and I don’t know why. I know Johnny doesn’t hate Whites. I don’t hate blacks and I meant “scum” in a loving way. 🙂

          • JohnEngelman

            My assertion has always been that Jews and Orientals tend to be more intelligent than white Gentiles. It is easy for me to document that assertion using material I have found on this website.

          • JohnEngelman

            A traitor to whom?

          • Frank Morris

            The same people to whom you are a traitor. Quit behaving as though you are clueless.

          • JohnEngelman

            I will decide who deserves my loyalty.

            I have known many praiseworthy non whites, and a few whites who were not worthy of praise.

            My loyalty is given to decent people. If they share my interests and values, that is better. If they are intelligent, widely read, and well informed that is best. I do not care what race they are of, or which country they were born in.

          • Frank Morris

            “I will decide who deserves my loyalty.”

            Of course you will, just as everyone does. Readers of your comments will also decide what they think of them, and, by extension, you.

            Telling you what I think is not the same thing as telling you what to think. You know this.

          • JohnEngelman

            I do not solicit the good opinion of those who are hostile to non whites and Jews.

            I say after Franklin Roosevelt, “They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.”

          • Frank Morris

            No one said you did, and your misrepresentation of everyone who disagrees with many of the points you make as being hostile to others rather than supportive of their own group is typical of your rhetoric.

          • JohnEngelman

            My “group” includes decent people of all races and nations. Do you think there is something wrong with that?

          • Frank Morris

            I made no attempt to define what you see as “your group,” nor did I make a value judgement of it in that comment. I would be delighted to ever receive a response from you that entails something other than attempting to falsely characterize the comments of those who disagree with you.

          • Frank Morris

            Take note, I didn’t say he IS a traitor, I said he was being treated like one.

          • JohnEngelman

            Note taken.

          • WhiteGuyInJapan

            “1. In regard to Orientals, 5-6 points is not much…

            a. I believe there is a greater variation in IQ among Whites which results in high numbers of geniuses as well as tards…perhaps more geniuses than the Oriental…”
            I have read of the wider distribution of IQ among Whites, may explain a lot. In addition, Whites on average have higher levels of testosterone, which gives a predisposition towards taking initiation and exploring. In addition, or a result of, European cultures tend to promote and reward a higher level of experimentation.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Yeah, it could be any number of things beyond raw computational IQ median/mean/mode.
            I think East and West dance a nice yin/yang sort of dance in the big picture of history. They meet in some places, like central Asia and the west coast of America, but they should both also always have their own homes and homelands.
            Would love to hear some stories, whiteguyinjapan, about what Japanese think of our favorite topics here. Perhaps you’ve shared in the past and I’ve missed but feel free to re-tell.
            I respect the Japanese. They have nice airports.

          • WhiteGuyInJapan

            Airports in Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore are generally great-clean and efficient. Less so in other parts of Asia.
            The whole IQ issue can show some limitations of quantitative data and often misses volumes of qualitative data. Namely, cultural differences between Europeans and Asians. East Asian societies are skewed towards hierarchy and collective (=conformist) arrangements. They can produce quite successful and even prosperous societies, but they often lack a certain spark of intuition and experimentation. This is found much more frequently among Europeans.
            I have also read studies on genetic variations between the two groups. AR cited a few studies on the topic.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            “often lack a certain spark of intuition and experimentation.”

            I’m more verbal than mathematic but I always scored high on standardized tests in math because, as in math class where this didn’t cut it in the old days, I’m uncanny at getting close to correct answers, LOL!

            In real life this has at it’s best resulted in an ability to quickly assess a situation and “get a feel” for odds, so to speak. I should gamble more.

            Apparently my guestimation and almost right answers would make me a math genius in our fine schools these days…

          • Frank Morris

            They also have a sane immigration policy.

          • Frank Morris

            One must also factor in that many hispanics self-identify on various forms as “White,” and there are several ethnic groups who bear zero similarity to European whites who are lumped in as well, such as Arabs, East Indians, etc.
            This likely lowers the number by more than five points.

          • Alexandra1973

            That doesn’t mean we want them to displace us. They can use their intelligence to benefit their *own* nations.

          • JohnEngelman

            Why do you have so little confidence in the ability of white Gentiles to compete with Jews and Orientals?

          • LACountyRedneck

            If they’re so intelligent, why do they come here? An intelligent society shouldn’t have to move to another society to be successful. It simply doesn’t add up, Johnny. You’re math is fuzzy. I guess it means doing well academically doesn’t equate to being successful in life. Let’s all move to the White man’s land, no matter your IQ. Using your fuzzy math we should all move to Japan or Israel. Is IQ over-rated? Is logic, common sense, and creativity under-rated? I believe the greatest combo wins.

          • JohnEngelman

            They came to the United States for the same reason Europeans came to the United States, with as justification, and with frequently better results.

          • Frank Morris

            They came to an already built society. Western Europeans came to a wilderness full of stone-age savages and forged a nation. Big diff.

          • JohnEngelman

            Most whites in the United States are descended from European immigrants who moved here during the nineteenth century. They also “came to an already built society.”

          • Sick of it

            In your part of the country maybe. In the South, many lineages have been here since the 17th and 18th centuries.

          • Frank Morris

            Your assertion does not change the truth of my comment.

          • JohnEngelman

            Jews and Orientals who come to the United States legally, or who are descended from people who came to the United States legally have as much right to be here as you do.

          • Frank Morris

            Stop pretending I advocate for deportation of naturalized citizens. In the comments above, I stated clearly that a return to pre-1965 immigration policies would satisfy me.
            Try and represent my clearly stated positions accurately, if you wish to debate me honestly.

          • Frank Morris

            Even if true, it would be more accurate to say “an already built society, built by their own people, based on their own historical institutions and traditions, and dedicated in it’s founding documents to the perpetuity and well-being of their own kind.”

          • LACountyRedneck

            They followed Europeans. Now you’re simply being an eh-hole. Check mate, Johnny.

          • JohnEngelman

            They usually performed and behaved better than Europeans. They still tend to perform and behave better than white Gentiles. That is why they tend to be more prosperous.

          • JohnEngelman

            Jews and Orientals who came here legally have as much right to be here as you do. I am glad they are here. I am glad they are prospering.

          • Fathercoughlin

            Yes,yes yes a thousand times yes. Chinese steal technology like MAD. Chinese lie cheat and steal from society thru tax cheating,off the book pay,indentured servitude,prostitution,gambling,drugs,smuggling, academic cheating and gamemanship. What goes on in the Chinese household? I was in my youth in an “encounter group”,and one of the girls there was a Chinese named Lila. She hated her father with a passion. He threatend his family(!) with a gun and beat and abused the lot. Racial realism is nothing but a theoretical framework. White self defense is the main idea. And we do ack. that the low and vile jew has more IQ tha us,we sure as hell dont see him as God forbid,superior!!

          • JohnEngelman

            This is a comment left by SlizzardAjeosshi. The Chinese did not steel robotics technology from us. They are way ahead.


            I will answer your question to what is now currently the
            biggest Asian achievement.

            First let me put things in contest: I work for a financial
            group involved in private equity deals with several Chinese manufacturing companies. I’m not saying this to brag about what kind of hotshot I am, I’m just saying I may have the pulse of the situation a little bit.

            The area where currently North East Asia hold a world
            leadership so immense the West is not even perceived as a serious contender is robotics, with all the ancillary technologies attached to it (A.I., nano, innovative materials etc.)

            Japan used to be the world leader, now the dominant player
            is S. Korea from where 1 robot out of 6 in this world comes, Taiwan is also there while China is taking off rapidly.

            Robotics is on the cusp of pretty much redefining entire
            economic sectors: manufacturing, healthcare (Korean nanobot surgery is widely recognized as the best in the world for certain tumors), personal services, learning, logistics & transportation, entertainment, financial services etc.

            This is akin to a fourth industrial revolution the West is
            entirely missing. As i said every time i board a plane to Europe

            When I arrive I feel (even in the Northern rim) like all of
            a sudden I’ve been teleported to a black and white tv world.

            This giant leap forward has the purpose of keeping afloat
            the growth rate of countries with an aging and, in some cases, shrinking population (N. E. Asians have the lowest birthrate in the world) through a massive leap in robotic productivity.

          • LACountyRedneck

            Traitors tend to be worse for people of their own group than a non-traitor from another race. Any race.

          • JohnEngelman

            People who are self confident do not look for a collective larger than they are to identify with.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I’ve contracted your leprosy, Yellow John. Or Jaundice?

            Father Coughlin called me a fag! Have I ever defended gays here? Maybe once or twice, but not on a big soapbox. Sort of off handed recount of a couple of lesbian friends of mine.

            I guess once the Wolfenstein crowd has your number anything goes.

            I wonder if Father Coughlin would call me a fag in person. Maybe he wants to cross swords in classic Ernst Rohm fashion?

            This is all your fault, Yellow John…

          • JohnEngelman

            I am so ashamed.

          • Frank Morris

            AR does not agree with you. Taylor has spoken at Towson advocating White Student Unions, and always states that Whites have legitimate group interests. Why do you troll this site if you disagree with most of what it stands for?

          • JohnEngelman

            I have posted this before. Why do I need to keep posting it? Why do you keep following me around trolling me?

            “We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. ”

            I have never claimed to be a spokesman for Jared Taylor. No where does it say that I have to be.

            I agree with Jared Taylor, those he invites to American Renaissance Conferences, and articles that are posted here in order to quote to substantiate my arguments.

            As far as the interests of white people are concerned, I wish Jared Taylor would be explicit. I do not see how the interests of white Gentiles, Jews, and Orientals have different interests. We benefit from an end to affirmative action and a more adequate criminal justice system.

            I have explained this many times before. Why do I need to keep repeating myself?

          • Frank Morris

            Not following you around. I obviously enjoy white-advocacy websites. You say you enjoy mixing it up with people, and it’s so easy to make fools of us, but you begin to complain that you’re being followed and trolled when someone advocates their own position well.

            “We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate.”

            I am being absolutely polite in this debate. To quote what I’ve read you say over 100 times:

            “Do you have a problem with that?

          • Paul

            Every person with a functioning brain disputes it. I’m not even going to tackle Jews because it’s not allowed but the Chinese have built their current wealth on stealing every American invention they can get their hands on. While American companies have been paying Thousands of dollars for their PC software the Chinese have been paying nothing. Just a small example. Plus their wealth is generated from shipping rubbish to the west. Once the western economies can no longer function China will return to it’s very backward ways.

          • It doesn’t matter. We deserve nations of our own.

          • Anon

            And that is the problem right there. When you say decent you imply a large group of positive traits under that label. All of those traits and the word decent, itself are just euphemisms for white people. The lie is that multiple peoples of various nations, ethnicities and races have those traits. The truth is those traits come from white people and specific ethnicities and nations that reflect those traits, do so because they are made up of white people. The last two thousands years has been one long repeating and continuous pattern of white people expanding, exploring and colonizing outward from our lands. Everywhere we went, those positive traits you think are universal were almost completely absent. And they have become white spread ONLY because of strict and rigid white supremacism. We don’t call it white supremacism, though. We call it civilization and the rule of law. But all that is, is white people forcing non-whites to do things our way (the moral way), punishing those who refuse and building large amounts of wealth in the process, nor for ourselves but for all. Non-whites absorbed our white traits and agents of power in their lands adopted our way and rallied to our banner simply because it is far superior and has far more rewards than the dark and evil things they were doing beforehand. One race, has no goodness in them whatsoever (blacks….obviously) and simply will not keep things up unless tremendous force is applied to them the entire time. All other races, remove white people, and they slowly return to evil behavior they were engaged in before we came on the seen.
            The root of anti-white genocide is the lie that white morality is separate from white people, so we can kill off the white population and it won’t matter. The liberals openly and eagerly embrace the evil that results. But conservatives were there first and worse. They give lip service to decency while planning to send us all to the gas chamber. And they want us to think it doesn’t matter.
            And it is THAT agenda that is getting you so much flak. Every white nation in the world has been deconstructed and millions of white people have been killed and millions more harmed so that people like you can go “well, I’m not a racist”, I side with all decent people. You know what that line of reasoning makes you? A traitor….to your family.

        • Fathercoughlin

          its not enough to be a race realist. You also have to be pro-white. Race realism tells us that the Chinese will live a much much more daunting life in his own country. Allowing him to come here en masse is a massive windfall for him and a huge loss for us. Just being racially aware isnt worth a sack. Working to give power and status to the white male is what its all about, Alfie.

          • JohnEngelman

            It is enough to acknowledge facts that can be documented. How one feels about the facts is optional. Nevertheless, arguments need to be fact based and logical.

          • DaveMed

            Whom do you speak for when you say that?

            Surely not the proprietor of this site.

        • Paul

          A race-realist that loves only Asians and Jews and spends his time on a white website. As strange as that is, he still hasn’t discovered his favored races have never done anything without the white man

          • JohnEngelman

            When it comes to cutting edge technology, the Orientals are way ahead of us. This is what SlizzardAjeosshi posted:


            I will answer your question to what is now currently the
            biggest Asian achievement.

            First let me put things in contest: I work for a financial
            group involved in private equity deals with several Chinese manufacturing companies. I’m not saying this to brag about what kind of hotshot I am, I’m just saying I may have the pulse of the situation a little bit.

            The area where currently North East Asia hold a world
            leadership so immense the West is not even perceived as a serious contender is robotics, with all the ancillary technologies attached to it (A.I., nano, innovative materials etc.)

            Japan used to be the world leader, now the dominant player
            is S. Korea from where 1 robot out of 6 in this world comes, Taiwan is also there while China is taking off rapidly.

            Robotics is on the cusp of pretty much redefining entire
            economic sectors: manufacturing, healthcare (Korean nanobot surgery is widely recognized as the best in the world for certain tumors), personal services, learning, logistics & transportation, entertainment, financial services etc.

            This is akin to a fourth industrial revolution the West is
            entirely missing. As i said every time i board a plane to Europe

            when I arrive I feel (even in the Northern rim) like all of
            a sudden I’ve been teleported to a black and white TV world.

            This giant leap forward has the purpose of keeping afloat
            the growth rate of countries with an aging and, in some cases, shrinking population (N. E. Asians have the lowest birthrate in the world) through a massive leap in robotic productivity.

          • Paul

            Wasn’t the discussion about race? I believe that robotics require software. Without whites creating all these softwares long ago these Asians would still be in the stone age. Yes, they can make changes to things, but they don’t create.

      • RealisticGuy

        If you give a damn for European American interests, he isn’t on your side.

        • JohnEngelman

          I am on the side of decent people of all races.

          • RealisticGuy

            Don’t let him fool you. He wants European countries to be taken over by waves of Asians. He doesn’t believe we have a right to exist.

            We were having quite the discussion on the other thread, Engelman. It’s too bad you decided to ignore my arguments, and didn’t even try to refute them.

            Here it is again.

            You seem to say that IQ can be used to determine superiority among races. That is false. There are no absolutely better races. Only races with different abilities.

            Counting IQ for everything avoids mention of other metrics. After all, it was Europeans who gave rise to the industrial age. Obviously then there is more to achievement than just IQ. And put an Asian, or a European in the desert with a spear and a lone deer, and they will not fare as well as an African whose people have done it for eons. The African would be the likely survivor. Is he better? Not by IQ. By other measures, yes.

            And what of compatibility? Is it not also a tenent of race realism, of whichyou seek to seem educated, that the differences between races lead to tribal behavior, racial animosity, and eventually racial violence, genocide and/or separatism. Race realism itself speaks to undo your thinking.

            Is it in the interests of Asian countries, and Israel,
            having the best people, for their people to leave? If indeed “a country cannot have too many high IQ people”. And should not the best of peoplestay in their own countries, where they will avoid miscegination, and therefore having descendents less than they are?

            And finally, even if we disregard the arguments above, in the first place you put the state before the people, as if somehow the role of the state is to empower itself rather than ensure the true interests of the people. You don’t seem to understand that ethnic groups have a legitimate right to exist, and that means in practice, to have their own territory. Every ethnic group has a right to work towards its own future.

          • Bob Dole

            Amren’s resident Asian Supremacist

          • Frank Morris

            Decent people meaning anyone who agrees with everything you say.

          • JohnEngelman

            No, but it excludes those who think insults are adequate substitutes for the rational rebuttals they are incapable of.

            I will say this: I have known decent blacks and whites, and nasty blacks and whites. I do not care more for the well being of the nasty whites than for the well being of the nice blacks.

            Do you have a problem with that?

          • dean53

            The problem with “decent” blacks is the regression toward the mean. No matter how nice individual blacks may be, there’s no assurance their offspring and extended families will be polite, peaceful and self-supporting. In fact, the opposite is likely to be true. Also, whenever there are high concentrations of blacks, black bullies seem to rule the nest, intimidate decent blacks and run off whites.

            These exact same concerns do not apply to Asians, because Asians are quite different genetically from blacks. However, there are other concerns when massive, intact homogeneous Asian communities are allowed to prosper and grow in America, protected by civil right laws, legally sanctioned tax-exempt Asian advocacy groups (which are denied to whites), legally ignored pro-Asian racism, anti-white hiring quotas, etc., which give Asians an unfair advantage over white Americans, on top of their higher intelligence. A few Asian woman married to white men and their resultant offspring, assimilated into American culture, do not pose a similar threat.

          • RealisticGuy

            I have given you rebuttals. You have failed, time after time to counter them. You can’t, or else you would.

          • Frank Morris

            I just gave a rebuttal above that merely quoted him and pointed out the hypocrisy of his statements. AR already took it down.

          • RealisticGuy

            Apparently quoting him too much is against the rules. Wouldn’t want his contradictions and foolishness to become too obvious.

          • SoulInvictus

            “The Ashkenazim are the most superior race in existence.”
            -John Engelman

          • JohnEngelman

            If one values intelligence, and I do, that is certainly true.

          • SoulInvictus

            Try it with someone that doesn’t know better than to get into that circle-jerk of a debate with you.

            History doesn’t bear you out.
            But hey, yet again you’ve managed to completely derail the thread from the real topic and into the real important thing, that being the tribe and JE of course. Congrats, douche.

          • LACountyRedneck

            If that’s true, why don’t you move? That is a serious question. Why stay here? is there something here you value more?

          • RealisticGuy

            An utterly meaningless assertion, from a man full of meaningless assertions.

          • Frank Morris

          • LACountyRedneck

            That’s what happens when you contribute enough here or kiss the appropriate rears.

          • Frank Morris

            My experience exactly.

          • JohnEngelman

            You have nothing to contribute but expressions of anger at the fact that I admire Jews and Orientals. I admire them for reasons I frequently express, documenting my opinions with material I find in many locations, including American Renaissance.

            Get used to it. Get a life.

          • RealisticGuy

            Again with the ad hominem arguments. With the straw man fallacy.

            You don’t fight my arguments because you can’t, so you come after me.

            You say I dislike your admiration of Jews and Orientals, but we both know that isn’t what we’re talking about.

            I have given you many and varied arguments against your position, that Europeans the world over should import increasing numbers of Asians until their population is diluted.

          • JohnEngelman

            The topics of this thread are genes and racial differences. My comments are consistent with those topics.

          • RealisticGuy

            What does that have to do with my post? That is no answer at all.

            I have contradicted you, and yet you fail to counter me, no matter how many times I give you the chance.

            Don’t you get it? Unless you can counter, you have lost.

          • JohnEngelman

            How can I fight your arguments, when they are not debatable points, but expressions of your fear, anger, and hostility?

            Your feelings are facts about you. They are not truths about the universe.

            I like civil debates over controversial topics where facts and logic are what matters.

          • RealisticGuy

            If that is all they are Engelman, they should be simple to counter.

            Why don’t you give it a go?

          • Frank Morris

            “How can I fight your arguments”

            He doesn’t have to, so long as any comment that refutes him with his own words is removed. I’m sure if I keep pointing this out, AR will ban me permanently, but if this is the state of rational debate here, I will not consider that a loss.

          • Frank Morris

            “No, but it excludes those who think insults are adequate substitutes for the rational rebuttals they are incapable of.”
            Which is a good description of at least 3/4 of your comments. Holier-than-thou BS is just another service you offer, right?

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Originally to SoulInvictus, who was moderated before I could hit the post button…

            LOL! Poor Yellow John!

            I agree that his defense of doctrine seems to…lack a little…esprit de corp. I’ve hardly ever found anything he’s said to be intentionally dishonest, and according to acceptable Amren canon (pretty synonymous with “the latest and best vetted science”), Yellow John’s pretty spot on.

            He doesn’t “rah rah team” enough and has become a sort of “Charlie Brown”/kicking dog for those spoiling fer a tussle…HA HA!!!! They almost always come to him – let me repeat that – THEY ALMOST ALWAYS COME TO HIM, like in that Monty Python argument skit, and they ALMOST ALWAYS COME FOR ONE THING AND ONE THING ONLY, Oriental/Jew spew (OK, kind of two things I guess), and…

            Yellow John, he respond. He’s no dummy either, so he REALLY infuriates easily infuriated people.

            But the most valuable role of Yellow John, in my opinion, is as an ever dangling Nazi bait and chew toy. If there’s an escapee of Castle Wolfenstein around, behaving him or herself, Yellow John is just too tempting a piece of blood dripping red meat to resist sometimes.

            I’m a big fan of a little constructive destruction, you know?

          • JohnEngelman

            Thank you for this comment.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Just the Truth, sir.

            And don’t ever leave me dangling in a Castle Wolfenstein breakout at a less well moderated site again, man!

            Unless you got something you have to do, of course. Unlike the Castle Wolfenstein escapees.

          • SoulInvictus

            He doesn’t infuriate me. Far from it. The only infuriating thing about his predictable, skewed, cherry picked (insert your own) viewpoints is that they invariably derail the topic at hand. And mysteriously, the thread is inevitably bent towards “tribe” and asian supremacy. It’s intentional.

            This is the place for that why again?

            Others have described the futility of discourse with him better than I can. When confronted with the facts of history (or current events), he’s responded with nothing substantive. Or with pure stupidity like (somewhat paraphrasing) “maybe (white) creativity itself is a sign of lower intelligence. That other races like tribe and asians are more focused on important things.”

            It’s not infuriating, it’s just a waste of my time and board space in what is otherwise usually a fun and insightful exchange between like minded folks who have to deal with the JE outlook in every other aspect of their lives. So understandably, it chafes them when that sort rears its obnoxious head here as well.
            Sorry to see you infected with “his leprosy” as well.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            1. If he’s that bad and you he bores you ignore him. I know that Discuss has no such feature (does it?) but you can discipline yourself and simply ignore him. Hit the invisible “ignore” button inside.
            2. Amren devotes itself to two causes which go together like peas and carrots – White Folk and Truth.
            a. Fact: People love to argue with Engleman about two things mainly. Oriental (when I say “Oriental” I mean CKJ mainly east Asians) and Ashkenazi IQ vis-à-vis Aryan White IQ. John quotes the same numbers upon which much of the canon of this website and it’s owners is based. He’s not snatching those numbers out of his posterior or off some ideologized website. Why do people insist on getting angry at him for daring to assert these are true?
            Does he really advocate for Asian supremacy? I think you are imputing something there.
            Comparing and contrasting our Folk to others, I think, falls under the category of “polite debate” as delineated in that thingy up top that tells you how to act here. If your debate opponent takes a different opinion than you, politely debate him and kick his butt politely. Relatively. If you aim to personally insult, do so cleverly rather than rudely. It’s like throwing a spit ball.
            The definition of “who is White” is also a legitimate topic of conversation/polite debate here. I consider most Jews White so I think they belong here. And why would I not then want to talk about them?
            If there ever is a White ethno state or states, these questions will be unavoidable and therefore polite debate here seems a great opportunity to me.
            Finally hail to the moderators here. Not just kissing the behind, but a poorly moderated blogresponspit can rapidly devolve into the least productive and civil disaster imaginable in quick order.
            It’s just very unpleasant and though I understand well the short, nasty, brutal nature of this life…
            I don’t come here or anywhere else to post because I find it unpleasant and irritating. I tend to avoid such when it starts sucking up too much of my time and effort – unless it’s important. Like this. Amren is a delightful oasis in a sea of rudeness, spirited debate and all.
            This is one of Amren’s strengths, not weaknesses, it’s virtue, not it’s sin.

          • SoulInvictus

            “1. If he’s that bad and he bores you ignore him.”
            99% of the time, do you ever see me respond to his posts anymore? I learned. Sometimes with people that I enjoy discussing topics with usually, like yourself, I’ll get sucked into the threads, but seldom directly. Do you see much of anyone that is a long time reader of the site do so? Rarely. To begin ascribing reasons as to why, there’s a reason one wouldn’t be able do so without sounding like the typical leftard (“they’re terrible anti-semite/waaaycist”).

            The fact that so much of this very thread turned into the JE/tribe/asian show illustrates precisely my earlier points.

            “2. Amren devotes itself to two causes which go together like peas and carrots – White Folk and Truth.”

            Both being very far removed from anything tribe related.

            “a. Fact:…”

            As I stated in the last comment, it’s not primarily a forum about IQ test taking numbers. Except when those of limited creativity eat the thread in admiration of fill-in-the-blank favorite non-white ethnicities. Which is transparent in intent.

            “Does he really advocate for Asian supremacy? I think you are imputing something there.”

            Then you’ve missed some (a lot) of posts.

            “The definition of “who is White” is also a legitimate topic…”

            When you can opt for “white” when it suits/advances/hides your people, and can immediately step away from it at will into your own separate group.
            When you’re only white-ish by mixing to begin with.
            When otherwise your race/culture/religion/customs/whatever are far from western in origin.
            Then it’s safe to say you’re not.
            If they are, then high performing mulattos with long family residency in western countries are as well. And they’re not.

            I’m sure there are some brilliant almost white Iranians as well. And I’d equally say that this isn’t really the forum for them either.
            Frequently posting here to tout almost white Iranian IQ or whatever wouldn’t sit well with most either. Now add in the history of leftist west/white destroying tactics of a certain group, and it makes it all the more odious.
            To be accepting of it requires me and most others here, to whitewash both history and current events, to needlessly celebrate a group hell bent on wrecking everything valued by us. They do a plenty fine job of celebrating themselves elsewhere.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Yellow John Engleman, you stand accused of…

            Wanting “European countries to be taken over by waves of Asians”
            How do you plead to this charge, sir?

          • JohnEngelman

            Not guilty, your honor.

            The accusation has been made by those who are unwilling to acknowledge or unable to understand the nuances in my thinking.

            I like Orientals and East Indians for reasons I have explained many times using material I have found on this website. I am fascinated by the civilizations they have built, and by the cultures they bring to the United States. I appreciate the way they tend to behave and perform well in the United States.

            At the same time I recognize that all immigration contributes to the growing income gap that I have also complained about on this website.

            Currently the Asian population in the United States is 4.8 percent. I do not consider that to be the result of “waves of Asians” taking over the United States. As the economies in the Orient and in India continue to improve I expect lower rates of immigration from those countries. Few Japanese are moving to the United States. Few have for a fairly long time.

            The black population in the United States is 12.6 percent. That is the demographic that is causing problems for the United States.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            East Indians too! Jeezus John!
            Just kidding. Yep. I’ve always thought that a little, a trickle of non or questionably White folk into our nation, especially if an effort were made to filter out criminal and likely dependent immigrants, that the essential White, European nature and character of our people and civilization would be maintained, perhaps even strengthened if indeed prudent filters regarding ability and proclivity were maintained by a professional civil service serving a legitimate government.
            Here and there, now and then. And hey, what’s so bad about a (self) segregated “Little China” or “Little India” or even “Little Mexico” here and there composed of wisely filtered immigrants and their children?
            The problem, of course is the black genome (very small numbers required for disastrous cost) and lack of (sensible) “discrimination” and control of immigration. Also too much.
            But the messianic democratic totalitarians don’t even really want real diversity – they want something akin to what the sardonic and corrupt Judge Lex described “the system” as being in the recent Netflix gem, “Dredd” – a meat grinder.
            “People go on one end…meat comes out the other…”

          • LACountyRedneck

            You think the black pop is a greater challenge for us than the Hispanic invasion? Black pop has been relatively steady over past decades. Hispanics are changing our society and culture. I feel that blacks have been kept in check, other than the bitching, whining, assaults and handouts which we could handle without much problem if enough of us set our minds to it, but when the non-white hispanic pop reaches ?%, we’ll have a much bigger challenge. And what % will that be? The greater the number the greater the challenge. Now is the best time to do something, so I’m headed to the market.

          • JohnEngelman

            I do not think there is any reason to allow more Hispanics to move here. Nevertheless, I have had good experiences with the Hispanics I have known. I appreciate the way Hispanics stand up to blacks.

          • Fathercoughlin

            You’re getting to be an annoying fag.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            If your fishing for one of those better luck at Castle Wolfenstein, buddy.

            Some hot Ernst Rohm action going down behind the castle walls I’ll bet.

    • Fathercoughlin

      Johnny, I read the printed version and the Arthur Allen quote is thus:”Few areas…racial difference.In the 1920s eugenecists promoted sterilization of the unfit and later praised Hitlers racial codes while advocating laws that would EXCLUDE THOUSANDS OF JEWS FROM OUR SHORES.” Where does the “misery” part come in?

      • JohnEngelman

        Yours is an example of the guilt by association fallacy.


        Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people she dislikes accept the claim. This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:

        It is pointed out that people person A does not like accept claim P.

        Therefore P is false

        It is clear that sort of “reasoning” is fallacious. For example the following is obviously a case of poor “reasoning”: “You think that 1+1=2. But, Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, Joseph Stalin, and Ted Bundy all believed that 1+1=2. So, you shouldn’t believe it.”


        Just because the Nazis used genetics theories does not mean that the concept is erroneous. The Ashkenazi Jews who were targeted for the Holocaust have the highest average IQ of any racial group.

        • Grantland

          Treblinka Ground Radar Examination
          Finds No Trace of Mass Graves

          A detailed forensic examination of the site of the wartime Treblinka camp, using sophisticated electronic ground radar, has found no evidence of mass graves there.

          For six days in October 1999, an Australian team headed by Richard Krege, a qualified electronics engineer, carried out an examination of the soil at the site of the former Treblinka II camp in Poland, where, Holocaust historians say, more than half a million Jews were put to death in gas chambers and then buried in mass graves.

          According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1997), for example, “a total of 870,000 people” were killed and buried at Treblinka between July 1942 and April 1943. Then, between April and July 1943, the hundreds of thousands of corpses were allegedly dug up and burned in batches of 2,000 or 2,500 on large grids made of railway ties.

          Krege’s team used an $80,000 Ground Penetration Radar (GPR) device, which sends out vertical radar signals that are

          ihr dot org/jhr/v19/v19n3p20_radar dot html

          • JohnEngelman

            Treblinka Ground Radar Examination
            Finds No Trace of Mass Graves.

            – Grantland

            Says who?

            Holocaust denial is a conspiracy theory if the Holocaust did not happen, everyone who survived a concentration camp and every soldier who liberated one conspired to lie about what was happening in the camps.

            Conspiracy theories make assertions that are difficult to prove or disprove. If the conspiracy theory is implausible there is little reason to bother with it.

    • Nymous

      “Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference.”

      When confronted with a politically inconvenient truth, the political left condemns the idea of knowledge. That’s a pathological evasion on their part.

    • WhiteGuyInJapan

      Pursuit of equality can lead to disasters as well. I visited the Killing Fields in Cambodia recently and saw the rows of skulls that came from the Khmer Rouge’s horrifying experiment.

      • JohnEngelman

        The behavior of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge is incomprehensible to me. There is nothing in the writing of Karl Marx, or even that of Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung that justifies that.

        Still, it was not the U.S. Army that put an end to that, but the Army of Communist Vietnam that ended it.

        • WhiteGuyInJapan

          Different forms of Communism, I suppose. Both Mao and Pol Pot exterminated the educated and wanted agarian revolutions. The Soviets knew the value of having a few scientists around.

  • JohnEngelman

    The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet.

    – Arthur Allen, New York Times, May 16, 2014

    And they will not be discovered as long as people like Arthur Allen are able to suppress scientific research into genetic-controlled behavioral differences among the races, and the publication of the findings of scientific research into genetic racial differences.

    • Wholly Unconvinced

      I hate the thought of agreeing with you, but that is exactly the thought that immediately impressed itself upon me as i read the article. It was both amusing, and terribly depressing, seeing his statement about a lack of discovery due entirely to the suppression by him and his kind, and likewise being the very same thing which “a troublesome inheritance” tries to do away with. Irony at its best, made all the more pathetic by the fact that it likely completely escaped the author’s attention.

      You confuse me so, Engelman… Are not the NY times writers the standard bearers of your liberal ideals ? How dare you take issue with their written word, for it is just, and true, and indisputable! No?

      • JohnEngelman

        You confuse me so, Engelman… Are not the NY times writers the standard bearers of your liberal ideals ? How dare you take issue with their written word, for it is just, and true, and indisputable! No?

        – Wholly Unconvinced


        I subscribe to The New York Times. I think it is one of the best newspapers in the English language. Nevertheless, I do my own thinking.

        Keep in mind that Nicholas Wade works for The New York Times.

  • MekongDelta69

    And that’s why they call it The New York Slimes.

    They will NEVER pass up an opportunity to demean anybody who goes against their leftist ideology – especially one of their own. THAT simply will NOT be tolerated.

    • Nancy Thomas

      If there ARE differences…then whitey can’t be blamed for non-white failure. So…there cannot be any differences. See how that works? You’re dealing with evil RETARDS.

      • dean53

        Then the question arises: If there are no differences, then why blame Whitey?

      • paul marchand

        NailOnHeadAward ^ ^ ^ ^

  • David Ashton

    Depends on how significant is “significant”. Genetic differences in disease liability are pretty important to the patients and the doctors.

  • JohnEngelman

    in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States have largely avoided the classification of races as a “futile exercise,”

    – Arthur Allen, New York Times, May 16, 2014

    Using the Holocaust to suppress scientific evidence in favor of race realism, and scientific research to find more evidence is an example of at least two logical fallacies.


    The Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief is a fallacy that comes in the following patterns:

    X is true because if people did not accept X as being true then there would be negative consequences.

    X is false because if people did not accept X as being false, then there would be negative consequences.

    X is true because accepting that X is true has positive consequences.

    X is false because accepting that X is false has positive consequences.

    I wish that X were true, therefore X is true. This is known as Wishful Thinking.

    I wish that X were false, therefore X is false. This is known as Wishful Thinking.

    This line of “reasoning” is fallacious because the consequences of a belief have no bearing on whether the belief is true or false.


    An Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy with the following structure:

    Favorable emotions are associated with X.

    Therefore, X is true.

    This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples’ emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true.

    • LHathaway

      Nazi scientists did some genuine scientific study. Reasonable people have concluded that their methods were so horrifying or connected with what was horrifying, that humanity should not benefit from any knowledge derived this way. There was even a UN resolution condemning the use of any of their scientific research. Not that I’m giving creedance to all the holocaust claims. For want of an argument, science is not the most important criteria and reasonable people have concluded this.

      • JohnEngelman

        I am not in favor of scientific research that involves cruelty to humans or animals.

        Nevertheless, I think there should be scientific research into genetic reasons that individuals and races differ in behavior and ability levels. I think the results of this research should be widely publicized, and that it has legitimate policy implications.

      • Diana Moon Glampers

        Anyone who concludes that humanity should not benefit from existing scientific knowledge is not reasonable.

  • Drew

    As perhaps the American newspaper most widely read by literate readers around the
    world, one wonders what a survey of academic specialists ( e.g., in Russia, Japan, Hungary,
    China…) in American studies might suggest as to their views of just what is mythical and what is realistic about race in America.

  • Tarczan

    “While there is much of interest in Mr. Wade’s book, readers will probably see what they are predisposed to see: a confirmation of prejudices, or a rather unconvincing attempt to promote the science of racial difference.”

    So you are either bigots or idiots, probably both if you believe this guy.

    • LHathaway

      He makes a good point. No worse than the one Jared Taylor made at the end of his monumental ‘Banned in Halifax’ speech. Maybe that’s where the author got the idea from.

  • HJ11

    Allen’s review is by far the dumbest review of this book that I’ve read so far, and I’ve read most that are available.

    Allen clearly knows little about genes or the fundamental processes of evolution and he constantly demonstrates this in his review. I may comment again later if I have more time and point out all the stupid things that Allen says–but I imagine the intelligent readers of AMREN have probably already spotted them.

  • Martel

    Am I to ignorant to recognize the brilliant arguments against Wade’s new book, or are there literally none in this review?

    The New York Times, this is all they can come up with.

  • LHathaway

    “Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference”.

    He’s exactly right, if unwittingly.

    “researchers have found it useful to examine genetic variations that affect traits like diabetes in Native Americans or high blood pressure in African-Americans. But in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States have largely avoided the classification of races”

    This reminds me the later Roger Ebert’s review of the move ‘A Clockwork Orange’. Mr. Ebert proclaimed the evil character in that movie wasn’t evil because of any sociological reason, he was only as evil as the film maker wanted to him to be portrayed. ‘Race is a social construct’, and we’ll use any rationalization available to proclaim why that is so.

    A Clockwork Orange would be of beneficial viewing for any race realist, or any Britain for that matter. Especially pertinent is the second half of the movie where the protagonist get’s his just rewards. We’re all familiar with the first half of the film, how bad the character was in the film and how bad whites have been in the past and how evil colonialism was. The second half of the film, with the protagonist receiving punishment from all those he did wrong too, is something we’re a bit more familiar with in this day and age.

    Mr. Ebert began his review of A Clockwork Orange by calling it ‘a paranoid right wing fantasy masquerading as an Orwellian warning”. He closed his review of A Clockwork Orange by saying he disagreed with the films message, “in a society that is criminal, the citizen may as well be criminal, too”

    I guess that’s AmRen. I guess we can make Stanley Kubrick, the film’s director, the honorary first AmRener.

    • Ron Cheaters

      Eyes Wide Shut is another prolific film hinting about overlords. By the same late director.

      • Lord Sandwich

        Eyes wide shut was Kubrick.

        • Ron Cheaters

          Indeed. Along with Full Metal Jacket. I have the Kubrick Box set. I’m a big fan of his films.

    • Kenner

      I loathed Ebert. Another dogmatic, obsessive social Marxist.

      • Luis

        One of the irksome things about Ebert, is he automatically gave four stars to any film directed by Ingmar Bergman. It’s like he worshipped the guy. That, and his anti-white views.

        He was married to a Bantu woman, so I can see where his anti-white sentiment comes from.

  • “significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among
    races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet.”

    Obviously, if it’s taboo to look for them, and doing so can only damage your career, then such differences will rarely be found. Allen’s is a circular argument. In essence, he’s saying:

    “We won’t let you look for such genetic differences because we haven’t allowed you to look for them.”

  • TruthBeTold

    Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference.

    Let me fix that:

    Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than ignoring racial difference

  • Medizin

    Did Allen even read the book? Sounds like his opinions are based on negative reviews made by others.

    • JohnEngelman

      Arthur Allen does not care if the arguments in “A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History” are valid or not. Like others of his persuasion he wants to suppress the arguments because he fears the political policy implications of those arguments.

      • LHathaway

        are you being too kind? In reality, he want’s to suppress those argument because doing so is advantageous to him personally?

        You know, I tend to disagree with the genetics argument and favor the social argument. Don’t worry, apparently, that makes me an even bigger racist than you! If you’re white, you’re a racist no matter what. And soon, we all will be racists.

        • JohnEngelman

          I am so glad this book has been published. I am so tired of all the lies.

        • “You know, I tend to disagree with the genetics argument and favor the social argument.”

          Why? I think it’s almost got to be both. Nobody thinks genes explain everything; culture obviously matters. But to deny that there are important genetic differences between races also seems strange to me. It can’t be likely that the only major genetic difference between a white person and a black person is that they look different.

  • JSS

    “The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet”.

    Thank you Mr new york times writer, you are indeed a critical thinker. I have been saying it for years, the differences in behavior between pit bulls and labradors and ball pythons and mambas are purely due to racism and poverty.

  • dd121

    It’s really not that much of a minefield unless you’re a liberal and project a lot more subtlety than it deserves. In the context of the classification of other animals, it’s actually quite straightforward.

  • Daniel Schmuhl

    Some of his objections are actually pretty stupid when you think about them for more than 2 seconds. China has had higher population density than Europe for a long time, so that might be the reason why body odor was selected against. Also, they had higher standards than Europeans for hygiene until fairly recently. You would know this if you read history books.

    I hate how people will dismiss a lot of hereditarian theorizing and just accept the mental unity of mankind on the basis of no evidence at all. The *gene* theory of history is much more plausible and evidence based than most of what passes for scholarship in humanities departments.

    • TruthBeTold

      I don’t believe they dismiss it so much as they’re desperate to find more politically palatable alternatives.

    • You write, “The *gene* theory of history is much more plausible and evidence based than most of what passes for scholarship in humanities departments.

      I agree. But the problem is more complex. There are people in humanities departments who would publish papers very different than what we see today. But if they did, (1) their paper would never be published anyway, and (2) they would have instantly committed career suicide.
      Academia is supposed to be involved with truth. This situation in humanities and in other departments is a severely condemnable aspect of the current wrongful system of academia.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    “But in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States have largely avoided the classification of races as a ‘futile exercise,’ in the words of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza; the very concept of race is a matter of scientific debate.”


    The suppression of research on race these past seventy tears has been catastrophic for America. But this suppression has a moral basis of sorts. German intellectuals a century ago were enthralled by Darwinism. They debated the application of its central ideas — natural selection, inequality, struggle for existence — to a wide range of situations. A superb source is From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany (2006) by Richard Weikart.

    Darwin himself wrote to German child development pioneer Wilhelm Preyer in 1868, “The support which I received from Germany is my chief ground for hoping that our views will ultimately prevail.”

    A sample quote from the Weikart book:

    “Those skeptical about the role Darwinism played in the rise of advocacy for involuntary euthanasia, infanticide abortion should consider several points. First, before the rise of Darwin there was no debate on these issues, as there was almost universal agreement in Europe that human life is a group and that all innocent human lives should be protected. Second, the earliest advocates of involuntary euthanasia, infanticide, and abortion in Germany were devoted to a Darwinian worldview. Third, [Ernst] Haeckel, the most famous Darwinist in Germany, promoted these ideas in some of his best-selling books, so these ideas reached a white audience especially among those receptive to Darwinism. Finally, Haeckel and other Darwinists and eugenicists grounded their views on death and killing on their naturalistic interpretation of Darwinism.”
    As theory about how the world works, Darwin’s theory of evolution may be as lethal as the theory of atomic energy. In parallel to the nuclear non-proliferation efforts of nation-states these past fifty or so years, there has been a kind Darwin non-proliferation effort as regards the matter of race. But unilateral “disarmament” is risky in this domain as it is in the nuclear domain.

  • c684570

    “The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet.”


  • shawnmer

    So, here we go. They’re trying to formulate a punch back.

    This will be amusing!

  • dewdly

    The NYT starts out by quoting “population geneticist Luigi Cavalli-Sforza” as saying that the classification of races is a “futile exercise”. Cavalli-Sforza may have judged it “futile” only after he was pressured to take the politically-correct view. He frankly expressed his scientific view in the 1970’s when he wrote:“The differences that exist between the major racial groups are such that races
    could be called subspecies if we adopted for man a criterion suggested by Mayr (1963) for systematic zoology. Mayr’s
    criterion is that two or more groups become subspecies when 75 percent or more
    of all the individuals constituting the groups can be unequivocally classified
    as belonging to a particular group. As a matter of fact, when human races are
    defined fairly broadly, we could achieve a much lower error of classification
    than 25 percent, implying, according to Mayr, the existence of human subspecies.”

  • IstvanIN

    I am tired of the “holocaust” being the defining, or perhaps limiting, factor in every decision American, and Western people in general, make.

    • Sick of it

      Considering that more whites were killed during the same war, it should make even the average man wonder why the Holocaust, specifically, is the most significant event in human history. We don’t need to wonder, but we’re not ignorant of what’s going on.

      • Bob Dole

        Mao killed 90 million Chinese, not history’s greatest monster
        Stalin killed 60 million Russians, not history’s greatest monster
        Hitler killed 6 million Jews, MOST EVIL MAN, EVER

        • r j p

          Please check Red Cross statistics for number of Jews who died in Nazi Germany Concentration Camps.

          Sealed and guarded since the end of WWII at Arolsen, Germany, the Official IRC records reveal the actual Concentration Camp total death toll was 271,301.

          • Bill Moore

            Hello r j p,

            Thank you for stating the fact (not 6,000,000, but 271,301).

            The Holohoax has gone on long enough.

            Bill Moore

          • JohnEngelman

            That assertion is found on anti Semite websites, but not on a website managed by the International Rescue Committee (IRC).

          • I assume what you say is true, and hence it is definitely good to know. However, one place I don’t like in your comment is the use of the term “anti-Semite”. If a statement is true but judged negative toward Jewish people, then society classifies the statement as anti-Semitic. Yet it is a good to know a true statement.
            Let me state this in a more direct way. Some statements that are anti-Semitic are good. Yet everyone is required to believe that every statement that is anti-Semitic is condemnable.
            Also I want to get in a genuine dig toward academia. Academia is supposed to be involved with truth. It is a genuine, severe, big-time failure, in terms of both logic and morality, for academia not to acknowledge this problem with the term anti-Semitic.

        • paul marchand

          Stalin killed 60 million? Red flag up, grain of salt tasted.

  • De Doc

    Yeah, these types of reviewers will never understand the science and thus dismiss all evidence because it kills their increasingly absurd worldview that all humans are equal.

  • sbuffalonative

    While there is much of interest in Mr. Wade’s book, readers will
    probably see what they are predisposed to see: a confirmation of
    prejudices, or a rather unconvincing attempt to promote the science of
    racial difference.

    The pot calling the kettle black.

    This book certainly confirms his prejudices on the topic.

  • Mrfinoni

    I must read the book. overall the review is fairly respectful as one should be of pure science. good things are happening.

    • Kenner

      Don’t miss ‘The 10,000 Year Explosion’, by Cochran and Harpending….

  • Bill Moore


    The “out of Africa” hoax should have been tossed into the garbage can five years ago when Nature Magazine reported on a DNA study that showed that “Caucasians” actually originated in the Caucasus Mountains. The Caucasians then traveled to Africa, probably driven there by the ice during the last ice age. The Caucasians then moved north to Europe again after the ice receded.

    Every time I read “out of Africa”, it annoys me.

    Thank you,
    Bill Moore

    • JohnEngelman

      The informed consensus is that everyone who is not a Negro is descended from a small number of Africans who left Africa about 60,000 years ago. This includes Caucasians.

      • Ike Eichenberg

        The consensus is made from a group that contains a large number of people who think despite the massive evidence to the contrary that all races are equal in mental capacity.

        I am suspicious of the OOA theory as it is often used to support the race as a social construct fallacy.
        It could be true, but it could be the leftist academics are incorrectly interpreting the data to support their preconceived notions.

        Whenever there is an obvious political reason for academics to suggest a particular theory I am suspicious.

        • JohnEngelman

          The informed consensus is the scientific consensus based on DNA and paleontological evidence.

          Modern humans emerged in Africa 100,000 years ago. 60,000 years ago a one hundred to several hundred thousand left. We are descended from them.

          DNA evidence indicates that the San Bushmen of southern Africa are the oldest existing race. This means that our ancestors who left Africa 60,000 years ago looked more like San Bushmen than modern Scandinavians.

          • Ike Eichenberg

            I agree the academic/scientific consensus promotes the OOA theory.

            I suggest that many of these academics find the multiregional theory unpalatable and discount the evidence that does not support their preferred theory.

            I do not suggest that the OOA theory means all human groups have the same ability, but I do suggest that many academics lean toward the OOA theory because the multiregional theory makes the equality of separately evolved human groups statistically absurd.

          • JohnEngelman

            White nationalists who reject the out of Africa theory do so because they do not like to acknowledge that their ancestors 60,000 years ago would not have been served in Woolworth lunch counters in the South 60 years ago.

          • dcc2379

            Or maybe some people use the term “informed consensus” as a snarky way to shut down debate. Informed consensus is the pure antithesis of science, and I shudder every time I see it used as a label to stop debate or argument. Science is not and never will about consensus, unless one is talking about non-empirical, unprovable theories and beliefs. Of course, if something in not empirical and provable, it is not really science.

            Consensus is currently used by global warming proponents to state there cannot be a debate. There can always be a debate. Obama uses the “informed consensus” to act like the debate over Obamacare is over because the Supreme Court has spoken. They once had spoken about slavery in Dred Scott as well.

            Still, I don’t know why I point this out, because it is like talking to a liberal Democrat. Informed consensus really translates as “I’m right and you’re wrong.” Unfortunately, when ever I hear informed consensus, I never see immediately following it who is informed, what group makes a consensus, and the new rule of science is that it is like a popular election and if so, when was the election for consensus held. If people disagree are they the informed minority? I could once again point out the discovery of bacteria causing ulcers when it was once discounted by scientists the world over. At one time Galileo was informed but not of the consensus type. There are tons and tons of other examples that go on and on about science not being a consensus, and those who are informed are incorrect. Indeed, who cares if the majority believes something . . . that does not make something right! I

          • Ike Eichenberg

            Well said, I would have more briefly just stated the general consensus was once the Earth was flat, and we know how that turned out, but yours was much more elegant.

          • MikeofAges

            Scientist have mortgages, kids who need to go to college, a retirement to fund. Easier to emote on cue than to put all of that in jeopardy. Scientists are politically naive anyway. When you hear someone say “as a scientist”, know that you are listening to someone who is trying to avoid scrutiny.

          • Ike Eichenberg

            I agree, many WN likely are so motivated.

            Myself, not being a white nationalist, I neither reject nor accept the OOA theory.

            I am just skeptical of any research conclusion that has reason to have a political motivation.

            That your mind is closed to debate on the subject is noted.

          • JohnEngelman

            On any complex and controversial issue I think the consensus of the experts is more likely to be right than wrong.

            On the matter of the relationship between genes, IQ, success in life, race, and crime, the geneticists are in agreement that there is a strong relationship. It is only the social scientists who disagree. Social science can hardly be called science because it lacks an agreed upon way of distinguishing between truth and falsehood.

          • Ike Eichenberg

            The logical fallacy or your reasoning is argumentum ab auctoritate.

            They are “authorities” on the subject, so despite the fact that academics are subject to the pressures of political correctness they are more likely than not to be correct.

            I do not find this a compelling reason to accept the OOA theory.

            I do find the fact that members of the homo genus existed outside of Africa approaching 2 million years ago, and that there is no evidence of homo Neanderthalis in sS Africa conflict with the recent OOA theory.

          • JohnEngelman

            The paleontological evidence in favor of the out of Africa theory is that when fossil evidence of modern humans begins to appear outside of Africa after 45,000 years ago it resembles fossil evidence of modern humans living inside of Africa 100,000 years ago more than fossil evidence of other human sub species living outside of Africa 100,000 years ago.

            Skeletons of contemporary Europeans resemble skeletons of Africans living 100,000 years old more than they resemble skeletons of Neanderthals.

            The study of DNA evidence yields the same results. The DNA of all modern humans is more similar than the DNA of modern humans to Neanderthals.

          • MikeofAges

            See, but we’re part ‘thal man. That’s the difference. People who ain’t got no ‘thal want to get some of that ‘thal in their bloodlines. There must have been something about those’ thal chicks. Or maybe the females ran out and scored with the ‘thal dudes. Was was it about those ‘thals anyway, man? Where they did come from? And what makes it so good to have some ‘thal in you?

          • Ike Eichenberg

            You have basically repeated the “recent” OOA theory, and yes that is what it’s proponents conclude give or take on the time line adjustment for new discoveries.

            On the other hand an objective observer would consider the fact that academics and scientists are under universal pressure not to say or research anything that contradicts the racial equality doctrine as a bias.

            When Nobel Laureates are ostracized for speaking the racial truth you have an environment in which ALL research related to race is under pressure to be slanted.

            The recent OOA theory is commonly used to promote the myth that all races are “equal” and thus is subject to bias from the academic and scientific community.

            Given the well documented pressure to conform to the racial equality doctrine, the conclusions of the OOA theory are coming from a very biased group, as such I discount them.

            Could be true, could be partially true, or could be wildly inaccurate.

          • JohnEngelman

            According to the out of Africa theory everyone who is not a Negro is descended from one hundred to several hundred modern humans who left Africa about 60,000 years ago. 60,000 years are plenty of time for lots of evolution to happen.

          • Ike Eichenberg

            Yes, that is a regurgitation of the OOA theory, the same theory that ignores 100,000 year old anatomically modern appearing human remains far outside of Africa, such as
            Zhirendong, Skhul, Qafzeh, and the 200 – 400,000 year old Qesem remains.
            You need not continue repeating the theory I will concede that these are the general parameters of the OOA hypothesis.

            Rushton was a brilliant psychologist, but your logical fallacy is attempting an appeal to authority, an argument that because expert A suggests a position it must be true.

            But Rushton as a psychologist was neither an expert (authority) on genetics or anthropology.

    • Alex Anderson

      Everyone is from Africa.

      But clearly all the smart ones left long ago.

  • Ike Eichenberg

    I love how the left uses Jared Diamond’s tripe.

    If you consider the fact that it was produced very unscientifically with a predetermined conclusion, any objective scientist would dismiss the work completely due to confirmation bias.

    • Andy

      “If you consider the fact that it was produced very unscientifically with a predetermined conclusion…”

      which he announces in his introduction.

  • Mike Lane

    And this Arthur Allen is a scientist? His only argument against the author is that it is either fulled by racism or offensive (both of which are pure speculation). A real scientist, even if he disagrees, would be absolutely willing to look at this and have an open debate.

  • paul marchand

    Arthur Allen says: * The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet *
    Empirical evidence (Coulter and another study) says: B > W rape is 1000s of times the opposite.
    Ole Dumb PM ya axxes: say what ?

  • Raymond Kidwell

    The argument here that Asians have superior I.Q.s is incorrect in some ways. You should understand that there are a lot of low scoring “white trash” that bring down the mean average of whites. However, whites have far more geniuses than Asians, despite a much smaller population. One may be able to argue for I.Q. superiority in Ashkenazim but in East Asians its shaky at best. The mean average is only a couple points higher (because white average I.Q. is not 100 and Asian 106 as commonly stated. Whites usually average above 100 like 102 or so).
    Also most dumb Asians are not given I.Q. tests. The brighter Asians tend to immigrate to the West. This is also true for Indians and Africans. The ones that take tests are the city dwelling elite. The illiterate country side don’t take I.Q. tests or go to school. If we were to include all Asians in the test they would probably score similar or even slightly below whites on the mean. Still they would be far behind in the number of geniuses.
    I agree with the viewpoint that race should not be the most important thing when judging people. There are a lot of stupid whites and bad whites, there are good blacks etc. But if you do make an argument it should be fully informed rather than stating that Asians are clearly superior to white people. I do admit a lot of white supremacists want to down play Asian abilities a lot more than they should but I still can’t be convinced of some clear superiority. They may have some specific traits that are enviable but then others that are not.
    Secondly white preservation doesn’t need to be based on superiority. There should be some homeland, reservation or some place that whites can exist and be white to contribute to the “diversity” we all hear about. A white community can still contribute a lot to global society whether their average I.Q. is two points lower or not. However, some primitive people who score an average of 70 or so on an IQ test probably could not function in a complex society period. The same for excessively socio-pathic or violent people.

  • Alexandra1973

    So being a race realist means you’re a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    Yeah right.

    As far as the Holocaust, it wasn’t just Jews that were killed, but anyone else who wouldn’t obey the Vatican. It was racial and religious…and Rome has had a long history of anti-Semitism, since the Jews didn’t want to give it Jerusalem (which they shouldn’t anyway).

    Rome likely figured, eh, get rid of Jews AND heretics, nice deal in its eyes.

  • Berkeley Guy

    As always, if anyone does not believe that racial differences exist, then that person too has a bias, and that is a bias just like those with a bias that racial differences do exist. Biases aside, no person should be afraid of the findings by scientists.

    I am not afraid if all other races score higher than my race in test X. Just because some group as a whole scores better than my group that does not mean that I as an individual am somehow less than members of the other group. To think otherwise would be an instance of a statistical fallacy.

    Mr. Allen, if he holds an assertion in favor of or against the existence of racial differences, then he should promote scientific research to either support or weaken his hypothesis (or mere bias). Whatever the case is, we cannot afford to rely on opinion and conjecture.

  • Anon

    Charging the minefield of genes and racial differences?
    That is an interesting title and one I take exception to. Our media is controlled. That is not an opinion. Fifty years ago it would have been an opinion with arguments for and against it. Today, the brainwashing is so overt….so heavy handed it is far beyond anything dreamed up by the old soviet union. Far worse than even predicted in 1984. Virtually, every program, every article, every commercial is extremely overt in trying to portray anti-white, anti-male, anti-Christian, anti-family and basically a complete and utter distortion of real life.
    However, real life is still there….cough. One has only to open ones door and walk around and plainly see the cognitive dissonance between real life and media life.
    And the racial minefield only exists in media land. Outside of media fantasyland, very few people would disagree that race is real, races are different and the situation is genetic, not cultural and hence, unchangeable.
    If there is a minefield, it’s in the fact that, for the past 50 years, all institutions have been thoroughly infiltrated by anti-whites and taken over. The last 30 years or so, a litmus test has been applied. You must pretend what is on TV (but everyone knows is untrue) is reality. If you say, or far worse, act in accordance with, reality, you get fired and blacklisted. You aren’t thrown in jail, in the US, yet. But everywhere else white people live, that is a distinct possibility. Fear, not controversy, keeps white people in line.
    Today, of course, those willing to give in to get along no longer even have the opportunity as there are no jobs and the anti-whites obviously intend a financial collapse. Real unemployment is around 25% and new employment among career jobs is zero. That’s because the economy is steadily shrinking. That’s what a depression is. The intention is to put most people on some form of welfare and then remove the welfare. God only knows what will happen or what is intended to happen.
    There is not some sort of great debate over race. Everyone knows the truth, everywhere, in every country.
    They fear saying anything, is the issue.

  • WR_the_realist

    This is just the sort of hack job I’d expect from the New York Times.

    But in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States
    have largely avoided the classification of races as a “futile exercise,”
    in the words of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza;
    the very concept of race is a matter of scientific debate.

    So many perfectly sound ideas and policies are now forbidden because of “the shadow of the Holocaust”. It’s interesting that there is no shadow of the Holodomor. If classification by race is a futile exercise, why do the progressives in universities and government manage to do it as a matter of course, for purposes of administering affirmative action and racial set asides? It is precisely because race is real that the New York Times is scared to death of books like A Troublesome Inheritance.

    The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled
    behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception
    they haven’t been discovered yet.

    This is a disingenuous argument at best. Twin studies give overwhelming evidence that for IQ and many other psychological traits genes account for a large part of the variation within a race. Adoption studies give compelling evidence that genetics accounts for much of the IQ difference across races. It would be nice to identify the particular genes involved but hardly necessary to reach a sensible conclusion.

  • Peter Connor

    The usual politically correct anti-scientific drivel, with an implicit appeal to academic Inquisitors and witch hunters to halt such dangerous research. I had hoped that the Middle Ages were over, but apparently not.

  • Fathercoughlin

    You can marry a German Sheperd for all I care you attention craving dolt

  • Frank Morris

    If an opportunity presented itself, I’d give you a glowing reference, if I believed you’d really go!

    • JohnEngelman

      If I moved to the Orient I would still post comments here. I would talk about how nice it is over there, and how wonderful the people are.

      • Frank Morris

        I would expect precisely that.

      • Frank Morris

        If the part of the Orient you moved to was China, I doubt they’d let you comment on AR.

        • JohnEngelman

          That may be true, although I am not sure. I have read articles critical of the Communist Chinese government that were written by Chinese citizens living in Communist China. Those articles were published in American journals.

          Until the Chinese mainland adopts a democratic government I would rather live in Taiwan.

  • MikeofAges

    He was dweeb. And a not very nice person. He refused to marry until after his mother died, which was when he was 50 years old. If there is a heaven, I hope he and Gene Siskel are not together there. Siskel was a mensch. A real prince and a man with a good heart.

  • scutum

    Racial differences in everything from intelligence to behavior do exist and the science of genetics is now proving it. To continue to deny that those profound differences exist is to declare that the emporer is indeed wearing clothes when he is not, and hasn’t been for many years. Please be aware of the fact that there are many on this site that have a hidden agenda, and will continue to try and advance the causes of the tribe.

  • DeMarquise Elkins

    It was a few decades ago in the 1970’s that much of Africa did not meet criteria for civilization. Examples include covering up private parts while in public, banning cannibalism, having paved road networks, and disposal of human excrement.

  • DeMarquise Elkins

    Watch the Dinka Cow video on Youtube. They are just like us, with the same genes !

  • LACountyRedneck

    Thanks for the reply. The ratio is likely somewhere near ninety-nine to one. The U.S. and many Western Europeans countries get by far more non-White immigrants, legal and non-legal, than any other non-White country. I never said that the only immigration is non-Whites moving into majority White countries. “Let’s all move to the White man’s land”. Is that what you were referring to?