History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Wade’s book and the issues of IQ and (micro)evolution

May 17th, 2014 · No Comments

I am reposting this from three days ago, with this title: Mr. Wade, before spewing racist bullshit study the larger historical framework. WHEE, in the public domain since 2001, shows where you are going wrong




Warning! Darwinists are stupid, and stupid people don’t learn, or unlearn. This bullshit routine over genetic differences due to natural selection has been shown repeatedly to fail. I discussed it in Descent of Man Revisited, and explicitly sent Wade a free review copy two years ago. The book directly exposed this confusion over Jewish IQ.

Io9 ranks this book #1 on list of books marred by scientific racism.
Scientists need to shake themselves, beat each other over the head: Darwin’s theory is wrong. No amount of attempted correction ever makes a dent in these cretins.
The proposition that Jewish intelligence is due to recent natural selection is on very thin ice, and makes no sense, even on darwinian terms. We cannot finally answer this question until we can compare the development of IQ, that screwy measure, over the period since ancient Israel, and before. I can’t refute the notion outright, but the larger context shows clearly something else at work. Natural selection is always the case, but almost never results in ‘evolution’.

I have suggested multiple different scenarios here, but the real answers elude us. First, what is intelligence? Look at modern history. The vast number of innovations and creative contributions come from Gentiles with apparently lower IQ’s. With the significant exception of Spinoza, almost the whole of early modern transition to modernity is Gentile, until the French Revolution and beyond as a new class of professional intellectuals comes to the fore, with Jews suddenly beginning a statistical advance. It is here that the mystique of Einstein and the plus 150 Jewish IQ cases begins to mesmerize people, misleading the interpretations of the evidence.
This record of the facts of history should caution anyone studying this question. Jews are in denial here, because the confusing evidence is unnerving and we see in some quarters a quiet unconscious effort to make Spinoza the key to modernity, subtly denigrating most of the Gentile contributions. (That would be unfair to most Jews) Jewish culture has flowered since the French Revolution, with business, science, and a slew of categories. But none of the basic achievements of the early modern have been matched. This suggests the main advances in world history are due to something besides intelligence. At just this point Gentiles might be starting to preen their own feathers. But a study of the ‘macro effect’ as in WHEE shows that the Gentile creation of modernity is context based and directly correlated with the pattern of macroevolution. The modern transition starts in Western Europe (for reasons suggested in WHEE) after 1500 to 1800 in a set of key areas, easily explained by WHEE’s ‘frontier effect’, and this begins to taper off rapidly, replaced by second-tier innovations in business, technology and science, etc…This key data set cannot be explained by differences in IQ. I would estimate the creative genius’ of the early modern were around 120 to 130, with no doubt important exceptions like Goethe or Schopenhauer. The Jews and Gentiles with super high IQ’s never even made to the starting gate.
That suggests what the larger macro effect shows clearly: the macro history of man since the rise of civilization is independent of, but no doubt skewed toward, IQ.
The irony here is that Jews reflect both cases. I suspect, but can’t be sure, that the ‘Canaanite’ population zone, from which the Jews emerged, was significantly lower in IQ that that of the incoming Indo-Europeans. Then an immense balancing effect took place, and in modern times, the next of the great transitions, we suddenly get the appearance of a new population of now more intelligent Jews. But even so the seminal achievements of modernity are Gentile. NO mystery there either: the advances appear in universal culture. The isolated culture of the Jews is crippled by its self-isolation. We see the key in Marx. He was Jewish, but assimilated, even critical of Jews, and disowned his own Jewishness. His achievement was to universal culture. And yet now Marx is a fetish of a Jewish cult, as if the core of marxism were a Jewish culture achievement. We see at once where the problem lies. Marx sensed this problem but has been defeated by it. We should have seen a large number of Jews with high IQ’s suddenly making huge contributions at the seminal level, not just the nobel booby prize level. But, by and large, it never happened. We can see the very sad outcome in Israel: self-enclosed culture has started a regression in Israeli intelligence.

The route, then, to the modern Jewish increase of IQ is obscure, save that we see a correlation with the macro effect. Beyond that the adventure of the diaspora of Jews suggests a few key facts, especially considering the difference between Ashkenazi and other Jews. No one has gotten it straight, and the evidence has already been muddled over by confusing scholarship, but issues raised by Arthur Koestler, despite errors that might have caused his argument to fail, suggest the trail of Jews intersected with various Indo-European culture zones, climaxing in the decided blend of Jewish and Indo-European genomes. The point should be completely obvious form Yiddish, which is a cross with a Germanic language. Given this blend, the factor of some kind of selectionist process may well have amplified the effect slightly. Let me note that the Germanic achievement is almost directly correlated with the macro effect, starts with Luther, crests around the era of the Enlightenment, peaks and then tapers off, matching the phenomenon of the Jews taking off after the modern transition in areas of technology, science, and business, the second tier. The deeper innovations tape off through the nineteenth century. Look at the music sphere: Bach, Mozart,Beethoven, the already fairly late Wagner, then nothing.
The isolation of the Jewish culture, its tendency to correlate scholarly attributes with large families, could well have taken the Semitic-IndoEuropean stock to a still higher level. But even so the blend was not fully superior. Consider the record of achievements of Germans from Luther to modern times, a record broken by the Hitler era. It is unmatched in its scope. The Jewish achievement is obviously related to this, the details being hard to unravel.

In general measures of IQ have done more harm than good.They confuse people. I recommend over and over a look at the evidence of the ‘eonic effect’. The measure of IQ leads to confused thinking. The macro or eonic effect shows tha the advances of civilization have been amplified by IQ but were never dependent on it. The advances occurred in semi-directinal zone changes, and the result was achieved with or without high IQ, as indeed the history of the ancient Israelites suggests.

Darwinism is dangerous, because it is stuck in the minds of stupid scientists, and in turn echoes in the social darwinist ideologies of elites who are really dumpkopf menaces, fully able to succumb to applied darwinism, as the Holocaust shows.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment