“There are no such thing as races, subraces…99% of anthropologists agree…”–

—“There are no such thing as races, subraces…99% of anthropologists agree…”—

Appeal to majority fallacy. Appeal to authority fallacy. Appeal to self reporting fallacy. Appeal to statistics fallacy. (Do I need to list more of them?)

1) is it possible to classify people into categories of major races, minor races, subraces, tribes, clans, and families. (yes evidently so. it’s been done on geographic, linguistic, cultural, archeological migration, morphological, blood type, and genetic testing and is remarkably consistent)

2) do these classifications carry visibly morphological or empirically genetic correspondence (yes)

3) How many samples of a kin group do we need to trace their relations (~1000 to get within 3%), (why? genes are complicated and we do not know the causal relations, we can only now identify a few common markers, so we must output-test morphology (evidentiary features)as well as input test our limited understanding of markers.

4) what degree of precision do we need to falsify morphological, historical, linguistic, cultural differences? (given the colloquial measure that we are very little different from chimps, the degree of precision necessary to genetically falsify categories is ‘near complete’.)

5) do these evident categories correspond to evolutionary, reproductive, linguistic, and cultural records? (yes)

6) do people self identify with these categories? (yes)

7) do people demonstrate preference in association for these categories. (yes, in all walks of life)

8) do people demonstrate kin selection according to these classifications? (yes)

9) do people in democratic countries vote by these categories (yes, when demographic distributions are to their advantage)

10) do people in all countries report preferences (surveys) differently from how they demonstrate preferences (economic, marital, dating, friendship, phone calls, text messages, business relationships) (yes, universally – which is why the polling industry is in such a crisis)

11) do people in the the media, academy, state, and church historically lie about scientific theories and facts that would cause them disfavor with their customer bases? (yes, always and everywhere)

12) do people in the academy and the sciences demonstrate paradigm anchoring so severely that that they block research that contradicts their investments, and often paradigm reformation occurs only after prior paradigm authors have died? (yes)

13) do people in the social sciences demonstrate the highest rates of falsehood in the publications of papers, books, and articles? (yes)

14) does all the evidence lead us to conclude that reported opinions by social scientists differ from the scientific evidence? (yes).

99% of psychologists *report* that iq has no meaning.

Pretty much the entire social science profession other than economics is pseudoscience.

In economics we know (finally) why much of economics is pseudoscience. (data. method. cherry-picking and selective accounting. political bias, moral bias, class bias. gender bias..)

Don’t get me started on ‘global warming/cooling/climate change’. Or that we don’t have too many people living on the planet, or …..

Please do not come to a gunfight with a squirt gun. I don’t like having to waste my time defending myself against the room-temperature-iq crowd. You’re clearly a well intended useful idiot indoctrinated into marxist and postmodern pseudoscience just as the church indoctrinated centuries of idiots before you.

But thanks for forcing me to make this list so that I can use it over and over again.