Fundamental Quantum Uncertainty And Stingy Guitar Tuning

There is a very simple high school homework exercise question that I have kept with me for 30 or...

Yes! To Hell With Out Of Africa

Ah, life is good lately; can’t stop winning. Almost never recommend anybody, ‘cuz humans disappoint...

New Heights In Systemic Corrupt Science: Another Hockey Stick; Would You Fund For Retracting?

Well known: Critical science is career suicide. But did you know you are not even allowed to warn...

No Science Distorting Populism For High Trust Society

The prospect of a peaceful right wing revolution from the heart is no more but an April fools’...

User picture.
picture for Robert H Olleypicture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Samuel Kenyonpicture for David LePoirepicture for Ilias Tyrovolaspicture for Ladislav Kocbach
Sascha VongehrRSS Feed of this column.

Dr. Sascha Vongehr [风洒沙], physicist and philosopher, studied phil/math/chem/phys in Germany, obtained a BSc in theoretical physics (electro-mag) & MSc (stringtheory) at Sussex University... Read More »


“Not only a new kind of community but a new kind of man comes into history with the development of the Jews.” (H.G. Wells:“A Short History of the World” Chapter 22 “Priests and Prophets in Judea”, 1922)

Racism, “a new kind of man”, written by one of the brightest minds who did no less than predicting and warning the world about the second world war:
Genetic variants linked to autism spectrum disorders (ASD) contribute to enhanced cognition and are therefore positively selected in spite of the problems they also bring along – new evidence has just been published in PLOS Genetics [1]. The problems these genes bring along are the price to pay for relatively rapid evolutionary advancements. It needs a much longer time for further natural selection to smooth the bugs out – this is all obvious, simple science. Another example is the genetic predisposition of Ashkenazim Jews to diseases such as Tai-Sachs, which comes along with their high average verbal IQ, also a relatively recent evolutionary advancement.
Many cannot accept that IQ is largely determined by our genes. They do not trust the research. Pointing to such research is an argument from authority. Moreover, the research does not explain the mechanisms in the social realm well, and so the research can anyway only be supporting evidence, but it is alone not convincing and we do have to ask: Can we trust the science?

But it comes worse!
Often, we do not understand because we do not see the issue from the other side. For example, the person who believes in some sort of determinism, the "determinist", wonders why those others, people such as those who believe in ‘free will’, the “free-willers”, make a big deal out of that determinism may be used as an excuse. He exclaims: “Look, determinism does not imply that people stop feeling guilty about their misdeeds and start acting irresponsible. People are just as well determined to believe in ‘free will’.” A determinist naturally looks at what the assumed determinism implies, and in this sense, “what determinism may imply” is that.
Never compare between only Blacks (B) and others for example, or only Caucasian Whites (CW) and B. One should consider at least three together instead of only two. For example, consider also the North East Asians (NEA). Why? Without considering NEA, B and CW are merely two different regions in whatever parameter space, say crime rates, and all interpretations are still on the table. But relative to B, NEA are almost invariably on the other side of the CW data points, at even higher intelligence, even less crime, even less sexual dimorphism/rape, even higher GDP, graduation rates, and so on.

Yes of course it is damn scary when once