Theme: Science

  • FRANCE LOSES 4 POINTS OF IQ DUE TO DYSGENIC REPRODUCTION In France, are secular

    FRANCE LOSES 4 POINTS OF IQ DUE TO DYSGENIC REPRODUCTION

    In France, are secular IQ losses biologically caused? A comment on Dutton and Lynn (2015) Original Research Article

    Pages 81-85 Michael A. Woodley of Menie, Curtis S. Dunkel

    •Dutton and Lynn have identified a 4 point decline in French IQ.

    •Dysgenics and replacement migration are proposed as causes.

    •French IQ losses are found to be associated with the Jensen effect (ρ = .833).

    •A common factor of g loadings and 3 biological variables loads on the loss-vector.

    •This supports biological causation.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 07:32:00 UTC

  • ECONOMIC METHODOLOGIES AS CLASS PHILOSOPHIES (good piece)(useful)(for austrians)

    ECONOMIC METHODOLOGIES AS CLASS PHILOSOPHIES

    (good piece)(useful)(for austrians)

    Just as in physical science, information the model by which we fallible humans least inaccurately carry on a discourse and achieve understanding. Perhaps more importantly, as economists, we are more accountable for the externalities produced by our use of ‘terms of convenience’ than are thinkers in other fields. And these externalities matter.

    For example, the Cantorian fallacy of multiple infinities rather than ‘the rate at which we pair off positional numbers’ has led to intellectual externalities in popular culture if not philosophy and physics departments as well. Just as very few of those entities that mathematicians refer to exist as numbers, but instead exist only as functions. Just as economists refer to the movement of the curve rather than the behavior of individuals resulting in a change in an aggregate measure. These are habituations but they are unscientific terms in that they fail the test of existence unless stated operationally. And that is the problem with much discourse in economics.

    DEFINITIONS

    1) Natural : evolutionarily extant deterministic patterns absent the intentional or accidental intervention of man, and/or outlier events such as shocks. –“the natural rate of interest refers to the amount that would balance supply and demand for money (or maybe investment) in the evenly rotating economy.”–

    2) Austrian: the program whose members search for improvements in institutions of cooperation within the voluntary organization of production, distribution and trade through improvements in information, improving the ability of actors to plan. Purpose: improve symmetry of information.

    (Long term – Conservatism – K-selection – Capital – Aristocracy – Force/Law – Virtue Ethics )

    3) Chicago: the program whose members search for rules by which to extend non-discretionary rule of law by incorporating economic policy, such that interference via disinformation in the voluntary organization of production distribution and trade is procedural and non-discretionary, preserving the ability of actors to plan. Purpose: repair asymmetries of information.

    (Medium term – Liberalism – “Production-Selection” – Productivity – Bourgeoise – Exchange/Trade – Rule Ethics)

    4) Keynesian: the program which seeks the maximum discretionary limits of disinformation insertable into in institutions of cooperation within the voluntary organization of production, to accelerate consumption without dis-incentivizing consumption and production. Purpose: produce misinformation as an incentive to produce and consume.

    (Short Term – Progressivism – r-selection – Consumption – Working Classes – Gossip-Rally-Shame/Boycott – Outcome Ethics)

    5) Socialist: the program which seeks to circumvent the volatility and meritocracy of the voluntary organization of cooperation by providing information and institutions necessary for the involuntary organization of production, distribution and trade. Purpose: Eliminate individual need for information and decision.

    (Authoritarian – dysgenic selection – Proletarian Class – Revolt – non-ethical).

    This spectrum from NATURAL to SOCIALIST, constructed by changes in discretionary information, provides limits, and therefore greater tests of necessary truth content than any analysis of the meaning individual terms.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 05:15:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11973110/Scientists-and-mathematicians-test-higher-on-autism-spectrum-says-Cambridge-University.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-04 03:35:00 UTC

  • “There is a huge gap between liberalism and the life sciences.”-Yuval Harari

    “There is a huge gap between liberalism and the life sciences.”-Yuval Harari


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-01 05:20:00 UTC

  • Rafe’s paper on the failure of the 20th century thinkers to solve the problem of

    Rafe’s paper on the failure of the 20th century thinkers to solve the problem of social science


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-31 10:06:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/660397435542487040

    Reply addressees: @ne0colonial @SanguineEmpiric @wargfranklin

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/659871607570042880


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/659871607570042880

  • Day. 24 hours Year. 1 year Crossing the Galactic Plane: 60M years +/- 200LY Cosm

    Day. 24 hours

    Year. 1 year

    Crossing the Galactic Plane: 60M years +/- 200LY

    Cosmic Year: 225-250M years (circle the galaxy)

    Velocity 500K kph


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-31 08:55:00 UTC

  • +ian drake Science is, for ancient reasons, artificially separated from philosop

    +ian drake

    Science is, for ancient reasons, artificially separated from philosophy because while law and morality require justificationary reasoning, truth requires criticism; and survival from criticism leaves us with truth candidates. Science has evolved a methodology for cleansing error, imaginary relations, bias, wishful thinking, and deceit from our thoughts and words. Scientists are not calculators, but if they are indeed engaging in truth (science) then they must at some point make objective propositions.

    MY criticism of Lakoff, Chomsky and their ilk, is that they are practicing a long standing tradition of the Cosmopolitan enlightenment, which is to state a half truth in order to perpetuate a lie by means of suggestion. In the case of these immoral men, pseudoscience is the vehicle for their half truth. Because only pseudoscience can convey a half truth with the pretense of science.

    Of the various tests we subject our theories to, one is parsimony and its inverse: “full accounting”: weighing all consequences, not selecting consequences in a ‘ben franklin’ close (intentional selection bias, in order to create suggestion that overwhelms reason by appealing to intuition.)

    So when one practices the discipline of science, avoids parsimony, and avoids full accounting, one is not engaging in science but pseudoscience for the purpose of using suggestion to perpetuate a deception.

    The Cosmopolitans have a long history of half truths via pseudoscience: marx, freud, boaz, cantor, mises, and the frankfurt school. And their technique was adopted by the neo-puritans and feminists as socialism, keynesian economics, postmodernism, and political correctness.

    It has only been since about 2000 that science has begun to overthrow the deceits of these men. And I am quite confident that they will be remembered in history as what they demonstrate they are: pseudoscientists and propagandists with almost entirely political objectives.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-31 07:35:00 UTC

  • Should we require truthfulness in free speech, superstition, lies and pseudoscie

    Should we require truthfulness in free speech, superstition, lies and pseudoscience would be laundered from public speech.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-30 14:44:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/660105018847191040

    Reply addressees: @mariamarty16

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/659861813568368640


    IN REPLY TO:

    @mariamarty16

    Stephen Hicks sobre Igualdad:
    https://t.co/uHau9FPyCD https://t.co/QGWUK8P96O

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/659861813568368640

  • Q&A: “ARE THEIR ‘HIGHER’ PSYCHOLOGIES THAN TRUTH? —“It sounds like you’re reco

    Q&A: “ARE THEIR ‘HIGHER’ PSYCHOLOGIES THAN TRUTH?

    —“It sounds like you’re recognizing there are higher psychologies than that of the mere scientist.”—

    Well, I disagree that for the purposes of LAW and TRUTH claims, that there are ‘higher’ psychologies, but for the purpose of CREATIVITY yes, I agree. My position is that matters of creativity are the subject of aesthetics, not metaphysics, truth, epistemology, ethics, politics or war.

    I have observed the same reaction from scientists who think that they’re work is the most ‘spiritually advanced’: the critical rationalists are determined that they not be constrained, and are not responsible for the externalities produced by their failure to warranty that their work has been laundered.

    Why would I expect artists, authors, theists, philosophers, scientists or whatever other group that claims spiritual superiority to accept both that their desire for creativity in their frame of reference is not special in the least, that their work is not special in the least – only subject to less empirical tests of failure; or to accept accountability for their speech and action, since they themselves would say that they need no such limits, given their moral character, and desire to create not decide, not police, not punish.

    Except the evidence is otherwise. People want to pretend their smarter than they are, to utter nonsense, to obtain status with nonsense utterances, and not to be held accountable for that which they failed to foresee. People are ridiculous really, in all walks of life. But without such nonsensical pretenses we would not be motivated enough to get out of bed and struggle against the dark forces of time and ignorance.

    Given that more damage has been done by priests, philosophers, politicians, and pseudoscientists than has been done by warriors, the great plagues, and only matched by volcanic disruption of the ecosystem, it is merely prudent that the most irresponsible people warranty that they do no harm instead of escape liability for that harm they have observably done.

    Liars all. Particularly to ourselves.

    So as one who is learning, I understand the desire for creativity and experience. As one who defends civilization I also understand that we can, and must, limit the damage that can be done by those who would seek status and affirmation, and excitement, through falsehood.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-29 10:59:00 UTC

  • THE CHURCH OF PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC CONSUMPTION (Oprah for Liberals) Sam Harris, Chri

    THE CHURCH OF PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC CONSUMPTION

    (Oprah for Liberals)

    Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, Lawrence Krauss, Noam Chomsky, Ted-Show, John Stewart and Howard Stern: The Pseudoscientific Church of Consumption.

    All Mainstream Conservatives: the Church of Arational Accumulation.

    Sigh.

    We have the immoral pseudoscientists, and the moral arationalists.

    It’s nuts.

    (I’m open minded on Dawkins).


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-26 11:51:00 UTC