Banner
Lisa Long Leg: Vongehr’s Rational Free Speech Trump Cross For The Alt Right Revolution Of Love

Lovely Lisa Long Leg and Heil Hitler Screaming Nazi once again visit the Stupid Donald Trump Follower’s...

Moon Hoax Reloaded, The True Exploitation Of Blacks By Whites, Obama And Trump Again

If you are against the exploitation of Blacks, stop mislabeling, or do not stuff humans into...

Scientists For Trump In Spite Of Vaccine Autism And Climate Comments

Alternative Title:“Inevitable ‘Society of Walls’ versus the True Legacy of Donald Trump:...

Highly Effective Nanostructures From Fundamental Optimization Strategy

The engineering mindset often dismisses philosophy as useless for science. However, those who understand...

User picture.
picture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Robert H Olleypicture for Quentin Rowepicture for Michael Martinezpicture for Ladislav Kocbachpicture for David LePoire
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 »

Blogroll
Today’s emergence of nano-micro hybrid structures with almost biological complexity is of fundamental interest. Our ability to adapt intelligently to the challenges has ramifications all the way from fundamentally changing research itself, over applications critical to future survival, to posing small and medium as well as truly globally existential dangers.


1) Motivation (insufficient justification): Throughout the world, there is a ‘new enlightenment.’ Maintaining certain illusions has become so demanding and frustrating that increasingly people simply go for the plain truth because whatever else they say would make little difference in the reception. People witness such and thus find new courage to “call a spade a spade” without apologizing, since an apology in today's mainstream irrational discourse is a mere revealing of weakness that invites further attacks.

Life expectancy at birth is about six years shorter for White males than White females. This gap is about eight years for Blacks. Given the close correlation between declining health and early death, older males are effectively on average several years more aged than females. The detailed shapes of statistics could conceivably not support such ‘hyper-aging’, or it could conceivably result in only a few months of hyper-aging. The ‘Hyperaged Men Description’ is however strongly confirmed by the shape of for example Europe’s population pyramid. There is no far earlier onset of males dying, or any features that could point toward more exotic, perhaps purely biological explanations.

Research shows that the large proportion of Jews in positions of power can be fully explained by the available data on human intelligence. Proper statistics completely explains that the 2% Jewish population in the US contributes roughly 30% to high achievement. This research is silenced by editors of scientific journals not allowing peer review. Proper science on intelligence and behavior is effectively forbidden. It is such a taboo that even if something is helpful against anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, the establishment rather lets anti-Semitism unopposed than admitting that intelligence is about 80% genetic or that Blacks have on average low intelligence.

More than half, namely 60% of college graduates are female. Is this discrimination against men? And is the currently loudly demanded (and at Missouri University apparently well received) number of 10% Black faculty reasonable, or is this rather racist anti-East-Asian anti-Semitic discrimination?

As a whistle-blower and interdisciplinary scientist who appreciates the strength of philosophical arguments (read: logic!), I receive idiotic rejections declining to publish my work, perusing laughably silly justifications all the time. This is understandable in today’s throughout PC, eggshell walking careerist academia and publish-or-perish corrupted scientific community. But there are different degrees of how sure-of-themselves proud the rejections are for example. Physicists usually at least pretend to argue something, no matter it is clear that the editor or reviewers have not read beyond the abstract and reference list in order to find out whether they were cited.