Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42222156_10156653187192264_728773379

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42222156_10156653187192264_728773379384934400_o_10156653187182264.jpg THE CORRECT ANSWER

    (a) genetics (we have higher neoteny), (b) homogeneity developed low clannishness although we maintain high disgust sensitivity, (c) commercial societies develop liberalism since everyone is a customer for either marriage, cooperation, business, or politics (d) christianity pushed universalism in there as well which caused the really bad consequences (e) WORSE women cause the openness to suicide by immigration. Men have voted consistently against it. So OUR WOMEN WERE RECRUITED AND DEFECTED JUST AS THEY DID UNDER CHRISTIANITY.David HughesLack of balls?Sep 21, 2018, 4:03 PMIvan AlleyNot saying you are wrong but :(Sep 21, 2018, 4:04 PMCurt DoolittleI don’t make mistakes. it’s my job. 😉 lolSep 21, 2018, 4:04 PMJamie RobinsonOur willingness to go along as long as we can. When we stop. the whole worlds gonna know it.Sep 21, 2018, 4:06 PMCurt DoolittleyepSep 21, 2018, 4:06 PMChristopher IvančićThey have lost control of their nations to foreign entities that work against their best interests?Sep 21, 2018, 4:17 PMDane ClumA) what does neoteny have to do with it?Sep 21, 2018, 4:19 PMGiego CaleiroNope. https://kbimages1-a.akamaihd.net/4cf57842-4bb4-4fe9-a645-9aa9412865a9/1200/1200/False/the-secret-of-our-success.jpgSep 21, 2018, 4:19 PMGiego Caleirochildren are more friendly to new things, and more into play than into war.Sep 21, 2018, 4:20 PMCurt DoolittleAgain. I don’t make mistakes. it’s my job. 😉 lolSep 21, 2018, 4:22 PMJoseph L. DiekhoffI think its reducible to the fact that almost anyone with a brain is susceptable to MK ultra mind programming. Especially if they dont know or refuse to believe its happening to them on a daily basis.Sep 21, 2018, 4:25 PMDane ClumAre there multiple definitions of this word? I’m seeing neoteny in humans results in physical traits such as x,y,z….Sep 21, 2018, 4:30 PMStephen FlowersThe impulse to fairness, kindness and so on is part of the Indo-European way. It myst be managed with WISDOM. Left unchecked it becomes suicidal, ignored it ends in criminal excess like the world has never known before. Mastery of moderation is a difficult path.Sep 21, 2018, 4:57 PMGiego Caleironeoteny means you become an adult while retaining characteristics of non adults. Humans are more neotenous than chimps. Dogs more than foxes.

    Also works in the brain.Sep 21, 2018, 4:59 PMGiego Caleiro(b) Is false, as per the book above, and the Hajnal line, are a result of the anti-cousing fucking policies of Christianity in the 16th century and onwards. Do you even HBD chick bra?

    (d) Stop blaming christianity, which created everything you love, for your problems.

    Entropy + technology that reduces distance of memetic transmission can make the world a stinking pile of shit mighty fine on their own. Christianity didn’t do it.Sep 21, 2018, 5:03 PMGiego CaleiroAs I said before, Christianity is what created the civilization you love.

    No truth can make Aryan women have 2.1 kids or more. No country based off truth ever did it.

    But Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith both did.

    If you sustain your anti-christian standard of aspie “truth” in the face of that…. well…..

    then you’re just another Islamist in diguise

    😎Sep 21, 2018, 5:05 PMJoe Boyumfree willSep 21, 2018, 5:09 PMChristopher IvančićChristianity made women want to have babies.Sep 21, 2018, 5:15 PMGiego Caleiromhm…Sep 21, 2018, 5:15 PMChristopher IvančićGiego Caleiro The destruction of it not itself is the reason why civilization is in decline… atheists hate to admit this.Sep 21, 2018, 5:16 PMCroib MagaHigher neoteny than who???Sep 21, 2018, 5:16 PMGiego CaleiroThat’s pushing it a little. But it’s closer to the truth than what our friend Curt here likes to tell :pSep 21, 2018, 5:17 PMGiego Caleiroarabs, africans, abos, pygmis, etc.. everyone but east asians.Sep 21, 2018, 5:18 PMCroib MagaArabs? Pygmies? I’ll give you abos and BantusSep 21, 2018, 5:19 PMChristopher IvančićThese guys are going to end up making a new religion at the end.. because of their fear of ‘Jesus Smuggling’Sep 21, 2018, 5:19 PMBrandon HayesYou may be discounting economic incentives too heavily.Sep 21, 2018, 5:19 PMChristopher IvančićBrandon Hayes maybe.. economy in Europe was in shambles after the war.. but it didn’t stop the baby boomSep 21, 2018, 5:25 PMMurphy CellWhat if you redirected pathological altruism towards ones own kind?Sep 21, 2018, 5:35 PMEric GroseMurphy Cell then your kind would winSep 21, 2018, 5:54 PMDax RaynerHave other ethnicities around the world who adopted christianity had similar self-inflicted detrimental effects on protectionism of their culture and lines?Sep 21, 2018, 6:13 PMNick DahlheimCurt Doolittle for Pope. LolSep 21, 2018, 6:59 PMLance KennedyThere is only one God (to me) and Joseph Smith is his prophet.Sep 21, 2018, 7:40 PMMitch TwerskyIt was something Eisenhower said to Patton. Then it all went downhill.Sep 21, 2018, 7:43 PMDane ClumEverything I’ve read thusfar on neoteny relates to physical traits, and not behavioral characteristics. But for the sake of argument, let’s just say we aren’t using the scientific definition of the word. You are saying that white adults exhibit childlike behavior more so than other races do. What evidence of this is there?Sep 22, 2018, 12:26 AMIgor RogovThe downside of habitual out – group cooperation (with long periods in history when it was a strategy to survive and advance), which requires random acts of altruism and forgiveness to a complete stranger. How this is fixed on a genetic level would be very interesting to find out.Sep 22, 2018, 12:28 AMGiego Caleirohair, feminility, childplay, science.

    Read boook “The eternal child”

    I’m a scientist in the area, by the way. my adviser came up with some of the anacronic developmnet labels that are less famous than neoteny.Sep 22, 2018, 12:28 AMDane ClumIn my life experience I’ve found whites to behave in a more mature manner than other groups. I’ve also observed latin and asian women to be considerably more feminine than white women. Are there any articles or studies you can link me to backing up the claim that white adults are more childlike in behavior? Honestly, I’m not going to go out and get the eternal child…Sep 22, 2018, 12:38 AMDane ClumB is essentially saying that homogeneous societies lead to heterogeneous societies… no?Sep 22, 2018, 1:52 AMDane ClumC) commercial societies develop wealth and order, which leads to comfort and openness, and reduces the need for self preservation. The incoming population desires the high living standard while the host population whittles away.Sep 22, 2018, 1:58 AMDane ClumE) what is not mentioned is why WHITE women have been targeted by pulling on their heart strings, while it hasn’t happened to women of other races. To me it makes more sense to say: White people have higher empathy, and women have higher empathy than men, and lower awareness of the threats posed by incoming populations. Therefore, this current situation is a reflection of white societies empowering women in the sphere of politics to a much larger degree than other societies.Sep 22, 2018, 2:16 AMZen-o LechanceI think people are being manipulated by social pressure, to be so altruistic that they lose their identity… And I believe that is the motive behind all this sjw crap, it’s just the way to dehumanize us, that way we’ll be easier to control … and control our mindsSep 22, 2018, 9:28 AMZen-o LechanceI don’t think you can direct pathological altruism to your own kind because it would not be altruism if it would benefit youSep 22, 2018, 9:30 AMMurphy CellZen-o Lechance lol that’s ridiculous.Sep 22, 2018, 10:00 AMCurt DoolittleKin selection isn’t altruism.Sep 22, 2018, 10:35 AMMurphy CellCurt Doolittle is altruism bad?Sep 22, 2018, 10:45 AMWyatt StorchPut your kids in an institution at an age where narcissistic defense strategies are the only means of survival.

    Observe.Sep 22, 2018, 11:08 AMCurt DoolittleMurphy Cell it doesn’t exist.Sep 22, 2018, 11:17 AMCurt DoolittleNowhere in nature can we find it that isn’t self interest or kin selection.Sep 22, 2018, 11:18 AMCurt DoolittleAnd kin seletion is self interset.Sep 22, 2018, 11:18 AMMurphy CellCurt Doolittle self sacrifice doesn’t exist? Do morals exist? Not trying to challenge you here, just want you’re perspective.Sep 22, 2018, 11:21 AMCurt DoolittleSeriously, we cannot find any altruism in nature (it would be dangerous) that is not in self interest. When people act altruistically they are just buying options on future cooperation, and we evolved to have very clear perceptions of status (we are hardwired in the brain to calculate status) and so, we do what we can to increase or defend it. It’s not complicated.Sep 22, 2018, 11:24 AMCurt DoolittleA person who acts morally is buying insurance. The cumulative effect is a good thing. The more the better. The less the worst.

    Women have this in spades so it’s a freaking disease if its not controlled in them.Sep 22, 2018, 11:25 AMEric GroseCurt Doolittle are white women worse (or better) about this than other races?Sep 22, 2018, 11:27 AMMurphy CellCurt Doolittle I don’t know about that. Acting morally today can get you doxed, alienated from family and loved ones. Even discussing things that are “morally good” in the classical context can get you unpersoned on social networking. Acting morally can even get you thrown in prison today. I think there is a difference though between doing what is right and doing what is good. Doing what is right can require one to do something morally bad and doing good can lead to ones own death. So I think there is a tiny gray area between this cosmic “yin and yang” That allows for some flexibility. I don’t think a parent loves and sacrifices for their children out of the expectation that they’ll somehow get something in return. If that’s how someone looks at parenting then they are most likely just sociopathic no? Definitely not in regards to parenting in nature since existence is marginal at best. What does a bear get out of raising offspring that will simply take away more resources for them in the long run? So this impulse for altruism is rooted in instinct. Or am I in over my head?Sep 22, 2018, 11:44 AMRobert Radulescuhttps://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/11537306?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003Sep 22, 2018, 1:25 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerAsians have greater neoteny.Sep 22, 2018, 2:23 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerNothing, East Asians have more.Sep 22, 2018, 2:25 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerSame reason Jesus hung with prostitutes and tax collectors The physician is for the sick.Sep 22, 2018, 2:28 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerThis woman votes against open borders.Sep 22, 2018, 2:29 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerLiberals also not really Caucasian. They just play Caucasian’s on TV.Sep 22, 2018, 2:30 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerWhich means yes it is Christianity.Sep 22, 2018, 2:31 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerWyatt Storch good point.Sep 22, 2018, 2:32 PMLori Alayne Weber MillerChristopher Ivančić actually the feminist ideology that being a mother and wanting to raise and nurture your children at home is betraying your gender and the only good woman with a voice in politics is a barren CEO PHD that shouts her abortion triumphantly as victory over the patriarchy.Sep 22, 2018, 2:37 PMSimon Nick TemplarIf you could please stop before I’m old that would be great.Sep 22, 2018, 2:52 PMGiego CaleiroIf you think Joseph Smith is his prophet, and you care about the west, you’ll love my writing Lance…… Also add me on facebook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yw3-NZtD3nBilegQYnjdmUIRzRTn3njn3CwtKbI62Qc/edit#Sep 22, 2018, 3:46 PMLance KennedyKyle WahlquistSep 24, 2018, 2:57 PMJim YankowskyMy people come first, good luck everybody else…Sep 24, 2018, 6:06 PMKyle WahlquistInteresting statement. Anyone know where I can get some of the source data these arguments derive from?Sep 24, 2018, 7:45 PMLance Kennedyask CurtSep 24, 2018, 8:28 PMTHE CORRECT ANSWER

    (a) genetics (we have higher neoteny), (b) homogeneity developed low clannishness although we maintain high disgust sensitivity, (c) commercial societies develop liberalism since everyone is a customer for either marriage, cooperation, business, or politics (d) christianity pushed universalism in there as well which caused the really bad consequences (e) WORSE women cause the openness to suicide by immigration. Men have voted consistently against it. So OUR WOMEN WERE RECRUITED AND DEFECTED JUST AS THEY DID UNDER CHRISTIANITY.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-21 16:01:00 UTC

  • A MORE PRODUCTIVE APPROACH by Carl Onni I think this is more productive: – Most

    A MORE PRODUCTIVE APPROACH

    by Carl Onni

    I think this is more productive:

    – Most if them do not know they are engaging in female behaviour. They are children not opponents.

    – Some of them will change to male behaviour if this is understood.

    -Those who never will change, will only gain by having an opponent they feel is easy to demonise.

    The goal of every interaction with these people should therefore be to simultaneously accomplish the following:

    – Demonstrate moral high ground, because we actually hold it, and it makes demonisation of us a more costly strategy and it makes conversion or productive communication more likely.

    – Shame and ridicule those that will never change, but only as a means to increase the odds of change in the subset that are capable of change.

    As with all children truth must be administered in manageable doses. Cant tell a 5 year old his paintings are terrible.

    But perhaps its most productive to just go full force Team Truth (TM)? But i have the suspicion it is only preaching to the choir.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-21 15:26:00 UTC

  • THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY The question isn’t how we get along,

    THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

    The question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question:

    “Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?”

    The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest.

    So, as the Great Khan said:

    “Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.”

    “We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.”

    The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit.

    The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means.

    So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-21 13:26:00 UTC

  • CODDLING AND CAUSE by John Mark This coddling Haidt writes about is a result of

    CODDLING AND CAUSE

    by John Mark

    This coddling Haidt writes about is a result of the West, particularly American parents, taking for granted the results of our world-leading rule of law (yes, far from perfect, but still fantastic compared to most of the world) and incomparable power for granted, and trying to take it too far.

    The parents of today’s millennials lived an era where the US had no competition, and was a whiteopia.

    For their kids, they are trying to create a situation where there is no conflict, and if any arises, an authority figure is summoned to punish the “troublemaker” (any boy with testosterone, anyone who questions the status quo/PC, anyone who is not “nice”, etc).

    In a sense it is the inverse of having a militia. Softness. Feminism. Etc. And the naivete manifests in their politics too.

    The lefties say “Everything would be great if it wasn’t for these Trump voters being so mean to people of color and gays”.

    The civnats have trouble wrapping their heads around the fact that the color invasion means America is f***ed. They can’t imagine that things could have gone so wrong so fast.

    They are living in a fantasy, wishful thinking, almost out of habit for having experienced so many years of prosperity without any real life or death conflict in this nation.

    They can’t grock that death is at the door.

    (Until the wise stop it.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-21 11:28:00 UTC

  • September 21st, 2018 6:53 PM —The International Criminal Court (ICC) is “alrea

    September 21st, 2018 6:53 PM

    —The International Criminal Court (ICC) is “already dead to us” National Security Adviser John Bolton told the Federalist Society recently. The U.S. will, he said, resist the court “by any means necessary.” Why would the Trump Administration take such a hard line against “the world’s court of last resort”? Founded in 2002, in the wake of the Rwandan and Yugoslavian genocides and mass rapes, the international body was supposed to try evildoers who would otherwise escape justice due to broken legal systems in failed states. Opposing the court is not a new position for the U.S. or Ambassador Bolton. The Bush Administration refused to sign the court’s implementing treaty in 2003, contending that it would lead to trials of U.S. soldiers and spies by a politically turbo-charged body located in Europe. At the time, many European leaders opposed President Bush’s war in Iraq and questioned its actions in the war on terror, including rendition and holding prisoners indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay. Ambassador Bolton was even more prescient. He warned, in 1998, when the formation of body was first being debated in Rome, that it would be ineffective, unaccountable and overly political.”—-

  • September 21st, 2018 3:26 PM A MORE PRODUCTIVE APPROACH by Carl Onni I think thi

    September 21st, 2018 3:26 PM A MORE PRODUCTIVE APPROACH
    by Carl Onni I think this is more productive:

    • Most if them do not know they are engaging in female behaviour. They are children not opponents.


    • Some of them will change to male behaviour if this is understood.

    -Those who never will change, will only gain by having an opponent they feel is easy to demonise. The goal of every interaction with these people should therefore be to simultaneously accomplish the following:

    • Demonstrate moral high ground, because we actually hold it, and it makes demonisation of us a more costly strategy and it makes conversion or productive communication more likely.


    • Shame and ridicule those that will never change, but only as a means to increase the odds of change in the subset that are capable of change.

    As with all children truth must be administered in manageable doses. Cant tell a 5 year old his paintings are terrible. But perhaps its most productive to just go full force Team Truth (TM)? But i have the suspicion it is only preaching to the choir.

  • September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he qu

    September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question: “Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?” The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest. So, as the Great Khan said: “Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.” “We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.” The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit. The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means. So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.

  • September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he qu

    September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY [T]he question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question: “Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?” The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest. So, as the Great Khan said: “Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.” “We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.” The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit. The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means. So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_424109724

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_4241097243488157696_n_10156650204322264.jpg The distribution isn’t quite even.

    I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.

    Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.Andy CurzonGood ^^ (useful data).Sep 20, 2018, 8:16 AMJames JensenEveryone said I was not living up to my potential… but, secretly I knew I was doing exactly what I could… in fact, when I really tried to reach beyond my home life and local environment I got lost down some dark hole… I think in circles, around and around… my wife is the smartest and stupidest person I have ever known… whenever I have an insight and share it with her she says something like “and, you have just learned that? I’ve known that since I was a child… you can’t be that dumb “… but it is new to me.Sep 20, 2018, 11:34 AMJames JensenSep 20, 2018, 11:36 AMArman GhaffariIt really seems strange to me that I’m far above average. I feel like a retard.Sep 20, 2018, 11:54 AMHusam Al-Dahiyat100-110 can’t be “average” since IQ is by definition normed to have 100 as its reference point.Sep 20, 2018, 12:43 PMMarcus JamesYou and I both know why they consider 85-115 to be average. If they didn’t, a whole group of people would be considered retarded or borderline retarded.Sep 20, 2018, 1:05 PMBryan Nova BreyIn line with your assessment here, I’d like to read your thoughts on this post by Jordan Peterson (I’m not a fan) and the most popular reply by TheDrogger who throws him off so much that he has to edit his original post.

    From my perspective JP is manipulating the IQ distribution and claiming 3 standard deviations for average population and only 2 deviations for Jews and then calculating the resulting populations. He also doesn’t compare Jews to Whites.

    Thought you’d enjoy ripping JP apart in an area of statistics, IQ, population, and disproportionate representation.

    https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/on-the-so-called-jewish-question/Sep 20, 2018, 1:07 PMJoshua SkeensVox Day did a VERY extensive rebuttal on this that got him started down the warpathSep 20, 2018, 1:17 PMBryan Nova Breylink? I’d love to read it.Sep 20, 2018, 1:23 PMJoshua Skeenshttp://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-eminent-person.html

    Check anything with the “Jordanetics” tag.Sep 20, 2018, 1:28 PMArman GhaffariThis has been debunked by Vox and DukeSep 20, 2018, 2:40 PMBryan Nova BreyI think Eli Harman did a great job ripping apart JP, though my comment is more specific to the argument JP made regarding the Jewish Question. I think Curt will articulate what JP is doing and how he fakes the IQ distribution.Sep 20, 2018, 2:43 PMWyatt StorchThanks for this. Stealing.Sep 21, 2018, 9:02 AMEli HarmanJordan Peterson is a Jew; maybe not literally but in all other important respects…Sep 21, 2018, 9:23 AMChristopher MatthewThere is a massive difference between 85 and 115.

    Not just in terms of criminality, but education, professional success, choice of mate, how many children, etc etc.Sep 21, 2018, 10:00 AMArno KĂŚlandI just read Jordan Peterson’s response to the criticism provided by TheDrogger and there is a significant error in Peterson’s calculation.

    He claims that Jews with IQ’s of 145 or above are, in percentage terms, commensurate with their proportion of millionaires / billionaires. However his baseline for the total is merely the Jewish and White population.

    However, White Americans now make up little over 60% of the overall population. His baseline thus comprises only 63% of the total US population. Treating the remainder US population as he has done Whites would ought to reduce Jewish millionaire numbers to 25% of the total.

    Peterson’s calculation therefore only adds up if he assumes that there exist no 145+ IQs outside of the US’ White and Jewish populations.

    Although it might be argued that US adult population demographics are likely to increase the accuracy of Peterson’s baseline, it nevertheless remains considerably off.Sep 21, 2018, 10:02 AMDylan BoswellWhew! Just in the 2.2% by a hair (4 points).Sep 21, 2018, 10:36 AMCarl EluThe fact that there still is a identifiable jewish people is proof enough of strong in-group preference. It is simply not possible to propagate through time as a minority without it.Sep 21, 2018, 3:05 PMAlex BirchThis is sort of why I quit following bell curve lit in college, whereupon I realized with each successive generation of dysgenics, authorities will simply readjust the curve to such a degree that the marginally gifted appear geniuses, and the highly gifted, threats to our civilization. After a while, the facts become impetus for action. There is only one sane response to this catastrophe.Sep 22, 2018, 12:16 AMThe distribution isn’t quite even.

    I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.

    Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-20 08:14:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_424109724

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_4241097243488157696_n_10156650204322264.jpg The distribution isn’t quite even.

    I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.

    Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.Andy CurzonGood ^^ (useful data).Sep 20, 2018, 8:16 AMJames JensenEveryone said I was not living up to my potential… but, secretly I knew I was doing exactly what I could… in fact, when I really tried to reach beyond my home life and local environment I got lost down some dark hole… I think in circles, around and around… my wife is the smartest and stupidest person I have ever known… whenever I have an insight and share it with her she says something like “and, you have just learned that? I’ve known that since I was a child… you can’t be that dumb “… but it is new to me.Sep 20, 2018, 11:34 AMJames JensenSep 20, 2018, 11:36 AMArman GhaffariIt really seems strange to me that I’m far above average. I feel like a retard.Sep 20, 2018, 11:54 AMHusam Aldahiyat100-110 can’t be “average” since IQ is by definition normed to have 100 as its reference point.Sep 20, 2018, 12:43 PMMarcus JamesYou and I both know why they consider 85-115 to be average. If they didn’t, a whole group of people would be considered retarded or borderline retarded.Sep 20, 2018, 1:05 PMBryan Nova BreyIn line with your assessment here, I’d like to read your thoughts on this post by Jordan Peterson (I’m not a fan) and the most popular reply by TheDrogger who throws him off so much that he has to edit his original post.

    From my perspective JP is manipulating the IQ distribution and claiming 3 standard deviations for average population and only 2 deviations for Jews and then calculating the resulting populations. He also doesn’t compare Jews to Whites.

    Thought you’d enjoy ripping JP apart in an area of statistics, IQ, population, and disproportionate representation.

    https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/on-the-so-called-jewish-question/Sep 20, 2018, 1:07 PMJoshua SkeensVox Day did a VERY extensive rebuttal on this that got him started down the warpathSep 20, 2018, 1:17 PMBryan Nova Breylink? I’d love to read it.Sep 20, 2018, 1:23 PMJoshua Skeenshttp://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-eminent-person.html

    Check anything with the “Jordanetics” tag.Sep 20, 2018, 1:28 PMArman GhaffariThis has been debunked by Vox and DukeSep 20, 2018, 2:40 PMBryan Nova BreyI think Eli Harman did a great job ripping apart JP, though my comment is more specific to the argument JP made regarding the Jewish Question. I think Curt will articulate what JP is doing and how he fakes the IQ distribution.Sep 20, 2018, 2:43 PMWyatt StorchThanks for this. Stealing.Sep 21, 2018, 9:02 AMEli HarmanJordan Peterson is a Jew; maybe not literally but in all other important respects…Sep 21, 2018, 9:23 AMChristopher MatthewThere is a massive difference between 85 and 115.

    Not just in terms of criminality, but education, professional success, choice of mate, how many children, etc etc.Sep 21, 2018, 10:00 AMAaron KahlandI just read Jordan Peterson’s response to the criticism provided by TheDrogger and there is a significant error in Peterson’s calculation.

    He claims that Jews with IQ’s of 145 or above are, in percentage terms, commensurate with their proportion of millionaires / billionaires. However his baseline for the total is merely the Jewish and White population.

    However, White Americans now make up little over 60% of the overall population. His baseline thus comprises only 63% of the total US population. Treating the remainder US population as he has done Whites would ought to reduce Jewish millionaire numbers to 25% of the total.

    Peterson’s calculation therefore only adds up if he assumes that there exist no 145+ IQs outside of the US’ White and Jewish populations.

    Although it might be argued that US adult population demographics are likely to increase the accuracy of Peterson’s baseline, it nevertheless remains considerably off.Sep 21, 2018, 10:02 AMDylan BoswellWhew! Just in the 2.2% by a hair (4 points).Sep 21, 2018, 10:36 AMCarl EluThe fact that there still is a identifiable jewish people is proof enough of strong in-group preference. It is simply not possible to propagate through time as a minority without it.Sep 21, 2018, 3:05 PMAlex BirchThis is sort of why I quit following bell curve lit in college, whereupon I realized with each successive generation of dysgenics, authorities will simply readjust the curve to such a degree that the marginally gifted appear geniuses, and the highly gifted, threats to our civilization. After a while, the facts become impetus for action. There is only one sane response to this catastrophe.Sep 22, 2018, 12:16 AMThe distribution isn’t quite even.

    I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.

    Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-20 08:14:00 UTC