Not necessarily a smoking gun for something to be pseudoscientific. Academic journals can slump into an orthodoxy where they become gatekeepers and simply will not evaluate new claims.

It is the unwillingness, of the possible pseudoscientist, to offer and invite rigorous scrutiny, criticism, and debate of their claims or “discoveries” that is a more serious indication of pseudoscience than the lack of peer reviewed articles.
_____________________________________________

So, in short, perhaps number 3. ought to have been:

3.) Unwillingness to offer one’s work up, for evaluation/scrutiny/etc.

But note that while Stormfront likes to keep up the false image of non-violence, its community as a whole, rarely condone “I hate (insert non-WASP group here) because of…!” comments. Nor are they against cheering things like the hundreds of thousands of deaths from the earthquake in Haiti.

That’s not true. Stormfront advocates stupidity, but not open violence. They advocate for policy changes and bemoan the legendary Jewish overlordship, but they make to call to arms.

“When the current white majority becomes a plurality, and then a minority, they will act as a block, on racial lines, the way blacks do now with the Deomcratic Party.”

I doubt it. As time moves forward, I believe that economics will drive the divisions more than race. Look at all the rats on wall street who didn’t go to jail for what they have done. Look then at all of the people who will go back to jobs that pay less than the jobs they used to have. Nobody is going to be sniveling about “which races people don’t like” anymore.

Open your eyes.

Stormfront et al want to commit violence against you, against all minorities, Jews, etc. I wish violence on no one. When I say go our separate ways, I am talking about the way most of ous already live, not some fantastical white ethno state in the wilds of Idaho. Also, when I say.. ‘we won’t tolerate it anymore’ I mean that when the current white majority becomes a plurality, and then a minority, they will act as a block, on racial lines, the way blacks do now with the Deomcratic Party. Democrats receive about 90% of the Black vote. The day will soon come when that percentage is the same for whites and the Republican party. What does this mean? We will no longer have political divisions based on economic or ideological differences. Instead, our political differences will be almost exclusively racial expressions. And when that happens, things like AA, prefential treatment, etc, will be vote down. Possibly basic laws like Brown or the CRA64. I’d like to not see that happen, that backlash, that completely racialized politics. But I’m a cynic, I don’t see any other way. The history of multicultural empires is not a good one. With increasing division will come increasingly less to divide. Everyone will hurt from this. And, really, blaming whitey like you do only hastens the day. And, obviously, I can’t change that.

HA! This from the nimrod who just penned this:

“So let’s go our separate ways. The safest, healthiest, white people are those who live far away from you, Maine, Vermont, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho. We don’t suffer from your degeneracy, and we don’t want to. All of America used to be like that. You think your compaints will achieve something. Yes, they will. Right now, you can bully and bribe whites, but one day we won’t tolerate it anymore. GO AWAY. Everyone is happy without you, away from you, it’s ot just whites, it’s every ethnic grou that has ever had the displeasure to interact with you on a large scale. Everyone. Because their fears are real, your behavior is real.
Liberalism is all about the idea that black behavior can be changed, and nobody believes that anymore, except white liberals who live far removed from the reality of your proximity.

Oh yes…. much, much, different than Stormfront.

No one wants to stalk you Zek, you’re simply a narcissist. A projectionist narcissist who works at a crummy theatre called Politicized Anthropology, four block south of NeverNeverland and Righteous Indignation.

For Zek credentials reign supreme, except when they don’t. So opponents are racists, or computer salesmen, or chair makers. You always attack the person rather than the argument. Hsu’s a ‘wannabe’. Pinker is ‘discredited’. Watson is a ‘racist’. Crick, Shockley? It seems the only people who can comment on this issue are other uber lefty anthro types. Because that is how your field has operated for the past 100 years. Attack. Insult. You don’t agree, we’ll get you fired! Freedom of speech indeed. That’s your science. And yet look at Lewontin, a fraud. Montague was a liar if there ever was one. And so dated. So sad. Your lies and the culture of fear and cencorship they constructed are crumbling and there is nothing you can do about it.

Also, it just shows the sad frailty of your mind. You claim to belive in human equality yet your entire ego is wrapped up in feeling intellectually superior to everyone else. How sad. You worship your own intellect, what a penurious god. No wonder you’re so full of hate.

Zek and Abagond require there to be no differences between Sailer and Stormfront precisely because the former is such a threat. Except it’s not. Underlying all their vituperativeness is a fear that accepting the realities of race will necessarily lead to a new era of slavery. It will not.

That study was funded by the John Templeton Foundation, fairly well known in the scientific community for its intermingling of science with religion. They also fund projects on the fringes of certain disciplines, allegedly even some I.D. proponents, which otherwise would not receive any funding from other science sponsors. On a related note, godandscience.org keep citing some of the scientists of that IQ paper as sources. An organisation which has a keen interest in promoting scientific refutation for the hypothesis that homosexuality has a predominant genetic component.

Here we have the scientists that show an absurd amount of zeal in trying to prove a genetic predetermination of intelligence but at the same time insisting on proving genetic insignificance in homosexuality. To put their claims in other words, if you’re born dumb you’ll even get dumber as you grow up, (if you’re black you’re hopeless anyway) but if you’re homo you’re just ill and can be “healed” and put back on “the right path”.

Can anyone smell the hypocrisy?

From the paper Chuckwiththehippo mentioned:

Although tracing the development of such diffuse brain pathways between genes and g is daunting, g genes could boost a systems approach to the brain by opening tiny windows through which we can view diverse brain networks that are integrated functionally in their effect on our ability to reason, to solve problems and to learn.

This is highly speculative. The credibility of all the empirical sermon before this paragraph shoots itself in the foot by the mere mention of this central point.

On the other hand, conveniently omitted in this paper, there is strong evidence from laboratory experiments that structural plasticity has a significant underlying environmental component. It has been shown that synapses rewire themselves literally in a struggle of the fittest, according to its direct usefulness in a given cognitive situation. This is also known as “the Darwinism of synapses”. Synaptic plasticity is directly observable in the laboratory and potentially behaves identically in all healthy individuals within a given species. In layman terms, the heritability of cognitive performance can be qualified for the entire species homo sapiens, as it can for other species. However any genetic predetermination cannot be quantified within current knowledge as soon as the synapses “take over” in adapting to the environment, apart from epigenetic effects.
(To the diligent HBD copiers and pasters on here, I’m sure you can find the literature yourself. There is plenty out there. You might want to start with Jean-Pierre Changeux, William Calvin, Michael Gazzaniga and William Greenough.)

Now I have no problem with that, I think its funny. 99,9% of our genes are the same. Not bad. I have no problem with that either.

Some 2000 human beings survived one of the ice ages. That is not too much, practically one small village of humans.

When one thinks about these things and listens some race realist or HDBer or any one who tries his (usually his) best to preach how there are different human races, you can not but laugh, or at least smile. We are truly the same and here they are these guys, doing their best, trying to convince somebody that we are not. It is so funny sometimes.

@schwartz:

“Have a read of Linda Gottfredson’s interview on her faculty page. She had an extremely unpleasant time because her research crossed into HBD related areas.

Also, how do you think Zek would react if you published something that suggested group differences are partially heritable? Academics are people too, they don’t want to be hated.”

If Linda Gottfredson is an academic she knew what would happen in that direction. If you want to challenge the conventions of science, you better be ready to argue. You can not say ” My research prove that tomatoes are blue” and not expect some backlash or counter arguments.

If I wrote something like that, I think me and zek would have a very interesting debate or discussion of the subject. And on that note, I do believe that some group differences are heritable, culturally and environmentally that is. Not racially. A child born in Atlanta today would grow up to be a nice taleban if he would be transferred to that environment as a baby.

Well, actually there was an american taleban who turned to that thing as a young man. Was that genetic? Must have been, since the guy grew up in USA but became a taleban, hmm…

Academics are people too, yes they are indeed. They make mistakes, sleep too little, get nervous, forget things, eat just like any of us etc. I am academically educated guy. Many of my friends are academics. One of my relatives is a top class international nuclear physicist. I know they are just humans. But if you make a claim that majority of scientist agree with HBDers or race realists but are too afraid to say it, it is ridiculous.

The fact is that race realists and HBDers are beating a dead horse. You guys are like creationists. Your basic idea comes from 1800′s and it has been shredded by science ever since time and time again. The idea, race separation biologically, is an old one. You guys think that you have found something new on it. You have not. It is the same concept in new clothes with old debate techniques.

I understand that because you and some other guys here believe in it, you believe that science is showing that you are right, or that it is beginning to show that you guys are right. It is actually the opposite. The more science dives into our DNA and genetic composition, the more clear it becomes all the time how much the same we all are. I know it must be depressing and discouraging, but that is the way it is.

Now, if you, or anybody else make claims that there are separate human races with race based intelligence, be prepared to hear word Racist. That is because you are one. You may have convinced yourself that you are not, but you really are. It is a racist concept. It is that simple.

And since in our present culture racism is a negative concept, the attention towards to you guys will be negative.

So if and when you keep on holding to your beliefs, be prepared to face the criticism and even some angry rebuttal. That happens when your political stance goes against the values of the society and racism, my friend, is a political ideology. Not science.

If I had a donkey turd for every time an HBDer came on here with a prediction of where science WOULD SOON LEAD US, I could fertilize the Sahara.

-In the years to come, the Human Genome Project WILL vindicate my belief that races are biological!

-In the future, research WILL reveal to an even greater degree that intelligence is 80% genetic!

-In time, genetic research WILL substantiate what I’ve been able to extrapolate from the I.Q. test results of different ethnicities.

NOT science.

Z: I calls ‘em likes I sees ‘em. Obviously I still strongly disagree with your pass on the pseudoscience aspect of the debate (though since it’s not something you’re interested — as you’ve mentioned many times — that makes sense) but like I mentioned in a different post here that watching you two debate was like watching Darth Vader versus Sauron. Or, if you prefer, Godzilla versus Mecha Godzilla. Two baddies going at it is always fun to watch ; )

O: You’d be interested in my latests posts at my blog, for reasons that should be obvious to you. If you’re of a mind, check em out.

But yea, my main reason why I didn’t take up the scientific sides of the argument was because I am not trained as a scientist and didn’t feel comfortable discussings I had little to no understanding or knowledge of. I am not qualified to discuss genetics and the like and so I am more than happy to let others who have a greater understanding of those things hash them out. I don’t see why a layman’s discussion about these things can’t be had though, and like you said, when you simply respond to the Unamused’s of the world with “so what?”, they hem and haw about exactly what they would like to see happen. In his case, he wants to do away with Affirmative Action, yet as has been pointed out here and elsewhere, the simple math doesn’t work (there aren’t enough African Americans to “takeaway” all the jobs from Whites and Asians), half of all Black boys dropout of highschool, and most Blacks don’t major in the STEM subjects, which is the bulk and mass of Asians and the kinds of White guys who makeup a goodly portion of the HBDsphere tend to major in. In sum, it simply doesn’t make rational sense once you look at it.

Of course, then Unamused goes into a “it’s the right thing to do” argument – fine, I say, but how do you sell this to African Americans and those who support them in politics, media etc? He revealed that he had zero understanding of politics, public relations, marketing and the like. People rarely do things because it’s “right” but rather, because they have something to gain out of it. May not be fair, but it is life. All it sounded like at the end of the day was yet another Angry White Guy pissed off at the world because somebody – ie, Alpha Male Whites – took his cheese. Not a problem me and mine can or should solve.

Oh, you might have heard, but recently Charles Murray gave a talk that was carried live on C-SPAN; his lecture topic? The White Underclass. In fact, he’s got a book coming out soon called “Coming Apart” and is a followup to The Bell Curve. As you can see, he is focusing solely on the WHITE UNDERCLASS, and I am just tickled pink because I wanna see what will happen in the HBDsphere. Sailer talked about it over on his blog and there didn’t seem to be as much enthusiasm about it as there is for “NAMs”. Check it out.

Z: That said, I’m not sure your questions regarding IR’s are really… pertinent to this discussion.

O: They’re not; like I said, they were completely off topic. But given that we know each other a bit and we often interact on more shall we say neutral ground, I wanted to take the chance to discuss something that I know is rather close to you.

Z: And OKCupid studies are hardly scientific, especially since they’re done by a for-profit corporation who’s heavily invested in getting people to date each other through their website. Honestly, in that sense they too may fall into the category of pseudoscience. But anyhoo, I’m not currently aware of anything specifically with what you’re talking about, and I’ll save my opinions for a relevant thread on the subject.

O: As you wish; as for OKC, I fully admit that they aren’t the best tool in this regard to use – but they’re the best we got of the lot. Unless you’re aware of another organization that conducts surveys and studies of its members, and if you do, I’m all ears. Until something better shows up, they’re gonna have to do.

O.

Are you saying that my questions aren’t legitimate? If so, please explain why? Thanks.

O.

I calls ‘em likes I sees ‘em. Obviously I still strongly disagree with your pass on the pseudoscience aspect of the debate (though since it’s not something you’re interested — as you’ve mentioned many times — that makes sense) but like I mentioned in a different post here that watching you two debate was like watching Darth Vader versus Sauron. Or, if you prefer, Godzilla versus Mecha Godzilla. Two baddies going at it is always fun to watch ; )

That said, I’m not sure your questions regarding IR’s are really… pertinent to this discussion. And OKCupid studies are hardly scientific, especially since they’re done by a for-profit corporation who’s heavily invested in getting people to date each other through their website. Honestly, in that sense they too may fall into the category of pseudoscience. But anyhoo, I’m not currently aware of anything specifically with what you’re talking about, and I’ll save my opinions for a relevant thread on the subject.

Schwartz,

This is what HBD’ers think too.

No, I disagree. HBD and race-realism have very clearly thrown their hat into the strictly hereditarian ring, with ONE caveat, any evidence which does fit their ideology is subverted with environmental exceptions to avoid creating contradictory evidence. An example would be testing that shows Black people scoring better than Whites, or Asians scoring less than Blacks, etc.

And also, most academics — of all backgrounds — support a dual hypothesis of nature AND nurture, and this has been the standard for quite some time. At least the 1950′s in many disciplines. UNESCO’s The Race Question is one such example.

Also, Also, how do you think Zek would react if you published something that suggested group differences are partially heritable? Academics are people too, they don’t want to be hated.

This seems contrary to HBDers and race-realists, who profess to ENJOY being “hated” by others, and often invite controversy by wearing their prejudice with pride. A blog entitled In Mala Fide is one such example; just check their About section.

Sepultura,

Haha, it’s funny you should say that because I’ve been writing a post about all the “props” I get from Black men here in SF seemingly BECAUSE I’m dating a Black woman (with natural hair to boot!). It’s cool, funny, and strange all at the same time. But I digress…

They are! I am living proof of this! The aliens are here for a buffet:

This what I really look like!:

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/77/880279-spitter_sola_s_large.jpg

This is after eating leg o’ man done over easy, cooked in garlic and butter(seared). HBDers, you’re next! I wonder if they would go good with fries? I wonder if I should boil or fry them? Any suggestions?

On a serious note; another example of pseudoscience is the cosmetics field who promote products and make claims that have been debunked time and again by scientist. Take for example skin cream:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/beauty/article3076047.ece

There is a sucker born every minute!